The Climate Change Conference in New York has commenced and here's hoping all media will be as constructive in their reporting as this post by John Tierney.
Embedded within Tierney's article is the link to this summary of climate realism: nature, not human activity, rules the climate. Credit Tierney also for requesting that comments focus solely on the accuracy of what the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change include in their report.
Now at least, the climate magisterium have a single summary of the objections to their dogma, the basis for alternative policy responses and the reasoning behind climate realism.
In his foreword to the NIPCC report, Frederick Seitz offers this cogent summation:
- The IPCC is pre-programmed to produce reports to support the hypotheses of anthropogenic warming and the control of greenhouse gases, as envisioned in the Global Climate Treaty.
- The 1990 IPCC Summary completely ignored satellite data, since they showed no warming.
- The 1995 IPCC report was notorious for the significant alterations made to the text after it was approved by the scientists – in order to convey the impression of a human influence.
- The 2001 IPCC report claimed the twentieth century showed ‘unusual warming’ based on the now-discredited hockey-stick graph.
- The latest IPCC report, published in 2007, completely devaluates the climate contributions from changes in solar activity, which are likely to dominate any human influence.
- Our concern about the environment, going back some 40 years, has taught us important lessons. It is one thing to impose drastic measures and harsh economic penalties when an environmental problemis clear-cut and severe. It is foolish to do so when the problem is largely hypothetical and notsubstantiated by observations.
- As NIPCC shows by offering an independent, non-governmental ‘second opinion’ on the ‘global warming’ issue, we do not currently have any convincing evidence or observations of significant climate change from other than natural causes
