Archive for the ‘uncategorized’ Category
Allan Savory, Environmentalist [and NOT a denier of AGW]
He has said that the primary contributor to global warming is desertification rather than the consumption of fossil fuels and by regenerating habit through the re-introduction of the herd-predator type arrangement, we can do a lot to reduce global warming while improving the productivity land rendered useless.
The above is just one of many references that deniers attribute to be the opinion of Allan Savory- the above was randomly plucked from the internet.
Allan Savory is just the kind of expert deniers need, he is informed, intelligent and is an environmentalist. His wiki bio gives some background to his views and expertise.
Allan Savory does not deny AGW nor stated that desertification is the primary cause. The issue derives from two different sources- in the first instance land use changes is recognised [even by the IPCC] to have an effect on climate change and this has been picked up on by some scientific deniers. In Allan Savory’s case his TED lecture was linked to by denier websites. His counter intuitive argument is that deserts need more cattle not less.
His arguments when taken completely within context have been criticised. This link is well worth reading. and you may want to read this for a fuller picture. For more research on the positive aspects of Allan Savory’s approach search for ‘mob grazing’ which is a technique some farmers are adopting.
Piers Forster, Climate Change Professor at Leeds University, said:
‘The fact that global surface temperatures haven’t risen in the last 15 years, combined with good knowledge of the terms changing climate, make the high estimates unlikely.’ –David Rose, Mail on Sunday, 17 March 2013
Dr [of sport] Benny Peiser would have us believe climate scientists are seeing the error of their ways and concede AGW isn’t actually CAGW. so what is Piers Forster’s stance on climate change? He certainly does not deny that AGW is happening and is serious but his comments can be interpreted by others for their agenda.
The BBC and the Guardian quote IAGP’s Prinicipal Investigator Piers Forster’s reaction to the leaked IPCC report. In his response to the recent posting by a blogger of the WG1 draft report Piers comments,
“Although this may seem like a ‘leak’, the draft IPCC reports are not kept secret and the review process is open…..I think we as scientists need to explore how we can best match the development of measured critical arguments with those of the Twitter generation.”
On the United Bank For Carbon website dedicated to saving rainforest for which Piers is a trustee, it says
He was one of the principal authors of the 2007 United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that was a co-recipient of the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize. He is also a lead author for the next IPCC assessment report, due in 2013. He currently leads a large research team, researching various aspects of climate change, principally investigating the multiple causes of climate change and possible climate mitigation strategies.
His research has convinced him that rainforest protection should be the first priority of any successful mitigation strategy. [“]Due to increasing CO2 levels in the atmosphere, rainforests around the world are actually growing more and more vigorously – this increasing growth rate actually removes around a quarter of the CO2 mankind emits every year. Yet we are still deforesting at an alarming rate. Research at Leeds has shown how this deforestation leads to both increased CO2 emissions and widespread climate effects, such as a reduction of rainfall in tropical regions.
Between 1990 and 2005 the world has lost over 10 million hectares of rainforest (an 8% reduction of rainforest area). And this deforestation itself emits more than a billion tonnes of a carbon annually, accounting for around 12% or more of current global carbon dioxide emissions. If we succeeded in stopping all deforestation tomorrow we would instantly cut our global emissions and make sure rainforests can continue protect us from the worst of climate change going into the future.[“]
The statement that: Due to increasing CO2 levels in the atmosphere, rainforests around the world are actually growing more and more vigorously – this increasing growth rate actually removes around a quarter of the CO2 mankind emits every year. will delight deniers who constantly refer to CO2 as plant food.
Other references to Piers Foster such as the link of black carbon to warming are also seized on by deniers. From The Guardian
“There are exciting opportunities to cool climate by cutting soot emissions, but it is not straightforward.
“Reducing emissions from diesel engines and domestic wood and coal fires is a no-brainer, as there are tandem health and climate benefits.
“If we did everything we could to reduce these emissions, we could buy ourselves up to half a degree less warming – or a couple of decades of respite.”
However, curbing the impact of soot may not be a simple process, the researchers pointed out. Typically soot was emitted along with other particles and gases that may actually cool the climate.
Organic matter in the atmosphere produced by open vegetation burning may have an overall cooling effect, for instance. But other reduction targets are likely to have a clear benefit, say the experts.
“One great candidate is soot from diesel engines,” said Forster. “It may also be possible to look at wood and coal burning in some kinds of industry and in small household burners. In these cases, soot makes up a large fraction of their emissions, so removing these sources would likely cool the climate.”
Tackling soot would have an almost immediate effect, because of the short amount of time it stays in the atmosphere.
While the leading greenhouse gas carbon dioxide remains in the atmosphere for long periods, soot emissions are washed out within a few weeks and then replaced.
“Soot mitigation is an immediate effect but helps for a short time only,” said Forster. “We will always need to mitigate C02 to achieve long-term cooling.”
Rose also quoted Myles Allen -professor of geosystem science in the school of geography and the environment and department of physics, University of Oxford- “David quoting me in the Mail on Sunday as saying that “until recently he believed that the world might be on course for a catastrophic temperature rise of more than five degrees this century” and “adding that warming is likely to be significantly lower“.” Myles recounts his misquoting in The Guardian. The quote by Piers also seems to be from a direct conversation with Rose- so far Piers has not responded to the wording: however the terms of science- i.e. high estimates which would lead to near extinction of humanity in 100 years does not negate the seriousness of IPCC low estimates. 2c increase is just an unknown change as 5c!
Climate deniers will happily mis-quote, quote out of context, lie etc any apparent voice that supports their opinion. Climate change is complicated and will have genuine voices of descent with regards to process and conclusions, it is the true scepticism of science, denialism however, will seize on anything and polarizes any minor differences and uncertainties. Because of the nature of the internet the words of Piers Forster will be around for decades as will Myles Allen and will be quoted by those who share none of the other views of the scientists and will dispute CO2 as a GHG.
David Evans, Rocket Scientist.[desmogblog.com/david-evans] a consultant to the Australian Greenhouse Office from 1999 to 2005.[“and part-time 2008 to 2010, (it was disbanded in 2007 !) modelling Australia’s carbon in plants, debris, mulch, soils, and forestry and agricultural products. He is a mathematician and engineer, with six university degrees, including a PhD from Stanford University in electrical engineering”] Is married to Jo Nova – blogger of denial site jonova, has his own website sciencespeak has written 1 science peer-reviewed paper back in the 80s not related to climate change science.
The campaign to force people to accept that “the debate is over” and that man-made CO2 emissions are driving climate change is in deep trouble, with another top global warming advocate – rocket scientist and carbon accounting expert Dr. Richard Evans – completely reversing his position. [Paul Joseph Watson, Prison Planet, July 22, 2008]
I DEVOTED six years to carbon accounting, building models for the Australian Greenhouse Office. I am the rocket scientist who wrote the carbon accounting model (FullCAM) that measures Australia’s compliance with the Kyoto Protocol, in the land use change and forestry sector.
FullCAM models carbon flows in plants, mulch, debris, soils and agricultural products, using inputs such as climate data, plant physiology and satellite data. I’ve been following the global warming debate closely for years.
When I started that job in 1999 the evidence that carbon emissions caused global warming seemed pretty good: CO2 is a greenhouse gas, the old ice core data, no other suspects.
The evidence was not conclusive, but why wait until we were certain when it appeared we needed to act quickly? Soon government and the scientific community were working together and lots of science research jobs were created. We scientists had political support, the ear of government, big budgets, and we felt fairly important and useful (well, I did anyway). It was great. We were working to save the planet.
But since 1999 new evidence has seriously weakened the case that carbon emissions are the main cause of global warming, and by 2007 the evidence was pretty conclusive that carbon played only a minor role and was not the main cause of the recent global warming. As Lord Keynes famously said, “When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?”
There has not been a public debate about the causes of global warming and most of the public and our decision makers are not aware of the most basic salient facts:
Slight change in opinion in 2011 Carbon warming too minor to be worth worrying about
Let’s set a few things straight.
The whole idea that carbon dioxide is the main cause of the recent global warming is based on a guess that was proved false by empirical evidence during the 1990s. But the gravy train was too big, with too many jobs, industries, trading profits, political careers, and the possibility of world government and total control riding on the outcome. So rather than admit they were wrong, the governments, and their tame climate scientists, now outrageously maintain the fiction that carbon dioxide is a dangerous pollutant.
Let’s be perfectly clear. Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas, and other things being equal, the more carbon dioxide in the air, the warmer the planet. Every bit of carbon dioxide that we emit warms the planet. But the issue is not whether carbon dioxide warms the planet, but how much.
Most scientists, on both sides, also agree on how much a given increase in the level of carbon dioxide raises the planet’s temperature, if just the extra carbon dioxide is considered. These calculations come from laboratory experiments; the basic physics have been well known for a century.
The disagreement comes about what happens next.
David Evans conclusions are challenged here. What is not dealt with is David Evans’ references to the AGW ‘gravy train’ and links to banking.
David Evans has written up a paper that describes just what kind of Octopus we are dealing with, and it’s bigger and more insidious than almost anything you can imagine. It’s a long paper, but if you are not aware of how our currencies are created out of thin air, backed by nothing, and why the Global Financial Crisis was not a surprise to those of us watching the money supply, then stand back, hold onto your hats and take a deep breath.
It’s like living in The Matrix. (Jo Nova)
Bankers and conspiracy theories have been around for centuries with ‘Protocols of Elders’ being key to New World Order paranoia. His language and insinuation is dealt with here, it makes for disturbing reading.
There are a small number of families who, over the centuries, have amassed wealth through financial rent seeking. They are leading members of the paper aristocracy. For example, the Rothschilds are the biggest banking family in Europe, and were reputed to own half of all western industry in 1900. That sort of wealth doesn’t just dissipate, because unless the managers are incompetent the wealth tends to concentrate. The banking families don’t work for a living in the normal sense, like the rest of us. They avoid scrutiny and envy by blending in and make themselves invisible. Since they own or influence all sorts of media organizations, it isn’t too hard. There are unsubstantiated rumors and conspiracy theories, but nobody can really credibly say how much wealth and influence they have.
What are the paper aristocracy going to do in the aftermath of the current huge bubble? The course and end of the bubble are quite foreseeable, so they must have a plan. Manufacturing Money and Global Warming 2009
When did David Evans turn from warmist to sceptic?
As a consultant to the Australian Greenhouse Office from 1999 to 2005 he seems to be a strong authority on the basis he has changed his mind given ‘new facts’ but when did this change happen, and did it happen at all?
Back in 2005 he wrote a paper claiming no hot spot for the The Lavoisier Group an organisation based in Australia that promotes scepticism of current scientific consensus on global warming. In a presentation to the group [pdf 2007] he says he was in fact a contractor to do computer modelling. He goes on to say that he is not a climate modeller and was modelling carbon in the human and natural environment. Despite being a contractor he says he resigned in 2005 but not because of his scepticism, this he says developed after 2000 when new evidence emerged [he only started to work for the GH office in 1999].
Fritz Vahrenholt, the the grandfather of global warming who after he changed his position was shunned, or rather:- The believer who never was.
Varenholt had studied Chemistry in Münster and started his professional career at the federal Umweltbundesamt (environmental protection agency) in Berlin and the Ministry for Environment of Hesse. From 1984 till 1990 he was in a leading role in Hamburg, first as Staatsrat for environment, 1990 to 1991 for the administral Senatskanzlei, and the Umweltsenator (senator for the environment) in Hamburg from 1991 to 1997.In 1998 he entered the energy industry and until 2001 was on the Board of Deutsche Shell AG, a Shell subsidiary. In 2001 he moved to post of CEO of the wind turbine company REpower Systems AG and remained there until 2007. From February 2008 he was CEO of electric power company RWE subsidiary RWE Innogy, a post he will step down from in mid-2012. Prof. Dr. Varenholt has a doctorate in Chemistry. In 1999 he was made an Honorary Professor of chemistry at the University of Hamburg.Global Warming Skepticism
Vahrenholt is skeptical of human-induced global warming. In 2012 Vahrenholt together with geologist Sebastian Lüning published Die kalte Sonne: warum die Klimakatastrophe nicht stattfindet (The Cold Sun: Why the Climate Crisis Isn’t Happening), a book asserting that climate change is driven by variations in solar activity. They predict the Earth is entering a cooling phase due to periodic solar cycles, and will cool by 0.2 to 0.3 degrees C by 2035. Other contributors are Nir Shaviv, Werner Weber, Henrik Svensmark and Nicola Scafetta.Vahrenholt’s claims have been met with criticism from Global Warming experts who have argued his arguments contain errors. He has also been criticized for misrepresenting the IPCC, and the evidence for Global Warming.   
The claim Vahrenholt was a believer and now sceptic is from notrickszone denial blog quoting the German media : SPIEGEL features a story on environment expert Prof. Dr. Fritz Vahrenholt, author of the new book Die kalte Sonne” (The Cold Sun). Vahrenholt’s underlying message is “It’s also the sun, stupid!”
THE CLIMATE REBEL
With heretical claims, RWE manager Fritz Vahrenholt is causing a commotion: ‘The climate catastrophe is not taking place’, the environment expert claims. The sun is being underestimated as a natural climate factor. ‘The sun has been weak since 2005′, Vahrenholt said in a DER SPIEGEL interview. ‘We can only expect cooling from it for the time being.’”
Fritz Vahrenholt, 62, who holds a doctorate in chemistry, has been a rebel throughout his life. “Perhaps it’s just part of my generation,” he says.
He is typical of someone who came of age during the student protest movement of the late 1960s, and who fought against the chemical industry’s toxic manufacturing plants in the 1970s. His party, Germany’s center-left Social Democratic Party (SPD), chose him as environment senator in the city-state of Hamburg, where he incurred the wrath of the environmental lobby by building a waste incineration plant, earning him the nickname “Feuerfritze” (Fire Fritz). He worked in industry after that, first for oil multinational Shell and then for wind turbine maker RePower, which he helped develop. Now, as the outgoing CEO of the renewable energy group RWE Innogy, he is about to embark on his next major battle. “I’m going to make enemies in all camps,” he says.
………I don’t claim that I know precisely whether the sun is responsible for a 40, 50 or 60 percent share of global warming. But it’s nonsense for the IPCC to claim that the sun has nothing to do with it.
In the same interview Vahrenholt reveals himself to be more lukewarm rather than sceptical
SPIEGEL: If we take your book to its logical conclusion, it will be unnecessary to reduce CO2 emissions at all.
Vahrenholt: No. Even a temperature increase of only one degree would be a noticeable change. But I am indeed saying that climate change is manageable because the cooling effects of the sun and the ocean currents give us enough time to prepare. In any case, it will be easy for us in Germany to adjust.
Vahranholt admits he is doing no original research. His environmental qualifications are also suspect as the quote demonstrates as well as his association with Shell. As for the believer who became a sceptic:- this seems to have derived from his book launch where he is described as being the founder of the German Green movement, a statement that is not true, he was an SPD politician who had the office of environment minster whilst the SPD and Greens were in coalition government. Spoke at the GWPF 2012 conference and reiterated his ‘green’ credentials.
Quote by Dennis Hollars, from the Senate Minority Report which contains hundreds, thousands of statements by scientists dissenting from the consensus.
Astrophysicist Dr. Dennis Hollars dissented from man-made climate fears in 2008.
“What I’d do with the IPCC report is to put it in the trash can because that’s all it’s worth,”
Hollars, who holds a doctorate in astrophysics from New Mexico State University, said.
According to a November 20, 2008, article Hollars added that “carbon dioxide was an
insignificant component of the earth’s atmosphere and that, rather than being the purveyor
of doom it is currently viewed as today, it is needed in order for plants to grow.” “Mars’
atmosphere is about 95 percent CO2 and has no global warming,” Hollars stated. Hollars
previously declared “man made global warming is basically flawed science at this point.
We do not have sufficient temperature data to even decide if there is a planetary scale
warming, let alone what the cause might be. In the ’70s it was global cooling that was the
scare – by many of the same people who are pushing warming now, using models that are
not even close to reality.”
‘”Mars’ atmosphere is about 95 percent CO2 and has no global warming,” Hollars stated’. This makes a refreshing change to the denial meme that ‘other planets are warming’ however as an Astrophysicist he really should know better than to make gaffs about Mars’ climate as it far less dense than Earth’s and has a minuscule amount of water vapour. And that old meme that ‘[in the] 70s it was all about global cooling’ has been so thoroughly debunked you wonder if deniers actually read the science. Perhaps next time he gets a copy of the IPCC report he should read it. Dennis has been known to debate the issue of climate change so next time be sure to question his knowledge on some of his key points
Dennis Hollars is sensible enough to invest and work on a green future with solar panels he co-founded and runs Nuvosun- Company description
Dennis and Dave have been together for more than twenty years when Dave hired Dennis out of Lockheed in 1987 to develop the world’s largest throughput disk sputtering system while at Domain Technology. These systems where in use for 18 years at Seagate Technology where three vacuum systems produce more than 70 million hard disks per year. Dr. Hollars was Mr. Pearce’s CTO at OptCom, SciVac, and MiaSolé. Dr. Hollars earned a Ph.D. in Astrophysics from New Mexico State University; a Master of Science in Astrophysics from the University of Arizona; and a Bachelor of Science, Basic Science, USAF Academy. Dr. Hollars is the inventor of numerous sputtering processes and hardware. Over the past five years, Dr. Hollars has become a recognized technical expert in the field of CIGS thin-films
Prof Myron Wyn Evans is another Moncktonesque character although does have a Ph.D and Sc.D
A climate denialist who is a member of the pseudo science e-journal Principia Scientific International which produces a number of time wasting ‘science’ papers that claim CO2 is not a greenhouse gas. They also republished a 1970s paper that claims the sun has a neutron star rattling around inside -‘Iron Sun’ theory.
from his bio on Principia-
“In 2005 Professor Evans was appointed by the Crown and Parliament as Civil List Pensioner in recognition of distinguished service to Great Britain and the Commonwealth in science. He is a Civil List Scientist on the advice of the Prime Minister and is the only “pure chemist” ever to have been appointed to the List. Originator of the Einstein – Cartan – Evans (ECE) Unified Field Theory, the simplest and most complete theory to date which unites General Relativity with Quantum Mechanics using just 4 dimensions. His work on ECE is published in “Foundations of Physics Letters”, a leading journal in the fundamentals of physics.Professor Evans is Founder and Director of the Alpha Foundation’s Institute for Advanced Study (AIAS) and Nominee for a Nobel Science Prize. He has also been granted Letters Patent of Garter and Clarenceux Kings of Arms. “
We, the undersigned, call upon the Royal Society to withdraw any support or advice which may have led the monarch to award a Civil List pension to a scientist who persists in bringing that award and its symbolic meaning into disrepute, and indeed to press for the forfeiture of said award.
Behaviours deemed to bring such disrepute might include: promotion of known frauds such as ‘perpetual motion’, illegal promotion of quack cancer ‘cures’, the blatant misrepresentation of current scientific understanding and the misuse of legal means to suppress legitimate scientific criticism.
“promotion of known frauds such as ‘perpetual motion’………blatant misrepresentation of current scientific understanding…” His self publicising website and ‘Institute’ found here promotes Myron Wyn Evans’ own Einstein Cartan Evans (ECE) theory, ECE would be useful as it would be a fabulous source of ‘free- um- perpetual’ energy. Associated websites peddle-www.et3m.net describes a range of products being manufactured by the Alex Hill group for new energy, energy savings, counter gravitation, anti friction devices and so on. TheSearlSolution – Website of John Searl developing a magnetic machine that “structures” ambient energy into useable power. They are well on the way to producing a production prototype designed to produce power on a useable scale. The ECE theory reminds me of a central of a plot by the ‘science’ fiction [fiction written by a scientist] Bill Napier- Revelation [2000- quite a few years before Evans’ theory]. (Evans’ self promoting web site is listed and there is only 1 scientist on the Civil List Pension out of 24)
Wikipedia has an entry for ECE which highlights the published theory in Physics Letters was criticised and the journal disassociated it self from it. Those interested can read this website where someone tells him just how wrong his equations are.
As for climate change – it one big conspiracy, this from his blog that mainly deals with self publicity, & self importance [he was nominated for a Nobel prize- except it was supposed be kept quiet, and we can’t check as only the names of nominees upto 1956 are available] and how important ECE is/will be etc.
Evans opinion of climate science is occasional and found on his blog. his interest in the denier publisher Principia seems to be due to the lack of credibility of his ECE theory.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
Thanks to Ioan ap Trefor , sometime Deputy Mayor of Swansea, for this document, which reveals the corruption inside IPCC. The climate is always changing, and I refer readers to the Norman Page blog in Texas for a scientific analysis of it. The Nobel Prize to Al Gore and IPCC was a mistake, and is not recognized by scientists. The experimental data give no support to the failed theory of global warming. In Wales this failed theory is used to eat up the environment. The People of Mawr recently threw out a wind turbine proposal, indicating to the whole of Wales that it should follow. Apathy is the greatest danger, if a determined and organized democratic resistance appears, combined with legal skills, the cynical, greed ridden multinationals will be defeated. I don’t care whether I am an “official” or “unofficial” advisor, I just advise, and these are scientific views which are listened to all over the world. We know this by seven years of daily monitoring of feedback, regularly summarized in an overview file on the blog or home page. Government departments all over the world regularly view the www.aias.us site, as well as all good universities.
Evans Glyn Eithrym
Civil List Pensioner
More from Myron wyn Evans at his blog
Wikipedia has an entry for his ECE theory that debunks it.
author of this paper REFUTATION OF THE “GREENHOUSE EFFECT” THEORY ON A THERMODYNAMIC AND HYDROSTATIC BASIS.
and one on the human eye- THE HUMAN CORNEA AS A MICRO MULTILAYERS CRYSTAL LATTICE. BIO-MECHANICAL AND TENSILE PROPERTIES ACCORDING TO THE “HALL-PETCH”RELATIONSHIP.
Don’t waste to much time reading it. Alberto Miatello is exclusively publishing with Principia Scientific International [if the website is ever down try the Google cache] and his qualification is being a law graduate.
The publisher was set up by climate deniers [these bios from their website]
Chairman & Founder Member: Timothy Ball PhD (Canada): Professor Timothy Ball is a renowned environmental consultant and former [retired] Professor of climatology at the University of Winnipeg. Dr. Ball has served on many local and national committees and as Chair of Provincial boards on water management, environmental issues and sustainable development. Dr. Ball has given over 600 public talks over the last decade on science and the environment.
Dr Ball came to the fore after his appearance in the sensational British Channel 4 documentary The Great Global Warming Swindle. Tim has an extensive science background in climatology, especially the reconstruction of past climates and the impact of climate change on human history and the human condition with additional experience in water resources and areas of sustainable development, pollution prevention, environmental regulations, the impact of government policy on business and economics.
Founder Member: Alan Siddons (United States): Former radio chemist but now leading climate researcher and science writer Alan has been a pioneer exposing a myriad of errors woven into post-normal climate science. Alan uses clear examples and common sense reasoning to illustrate where and why it all went wrong for politicized ‘goal-oriented’ government climate research.
Founder Member:Joseph A. Olson, PE (United States): Retired Texan engineer and impassioned science writer, Joe Olson PE is a respected innovative thinker with over 100 major civil engineering and climate-related articles to his name. Olson is famed as a staunch advocate of the traditional English scientific method and combines a wealth of hard-edged industry experience with an insightful and deft writer’s touch to convey complex scientific concepts in a unique literary style.
Founder Member:Martin Hertzberg PhD (United States): Dr. Martin Hertzberg is a long time climate writer, a former U.S. Navy meteorologist with a PhD in Physical Chemistry from Stanford University and holder of a Fulbright Professorship. Hertzberg is an internationally recognized expert on combustion, flames, explosions, and fire research with over 100 publications in those areas.
Dr Hertzberg established and supervised the explosion testing laboratory at the U. S. Bureau of Mines facility in Pittsburgh (now NIOSH). Test equipment developed in that laboratory has been widely replicated and incorporated into ASTM standards. Published test results from that laboratory are used for the hazard evaluation of industrial dusts and gases. While with the Federal Government he served as a consultant for several Government Agencies (MSHA, DOE, NAS) and professional groups (such as EPRI). He is the author of two US patents: 1) Submicron Particulate Detectors, and 2) Multi-channel Infrared Pyrometers.
And Alberto Miatello is even on the the team
Alberto Miatello (Italy): Alberto Miatello, is an independent researcher in the field of physics of the atmosphere/meteorology. Originally a law graduate, for many years Alberto worked as a business consultant, dealing with plants and machinery and specializing in the fields of technical physics, heat transmission and thermodynamics. This experience informed his spare time research, since 2002, into climate study and the physics of the atmosphere. Alberto’s main concern since then has been to refute errors in the theories of man-made global warming and the so-called greenhouse gas effect. Alberto’s paper, ‘Roy Spencer and the Vacuum Bottle Flask’ (February, 2012) has won praise for identifying that climate scientists wrongly assumed the vacuum of space is cold (it has no temperature).
Russia – Dr Yury Izrael, past UN IPCC Vice President, director of Global Climate and Ecology Institute, member of the Russian Academy of Sciences.
“There is no proven link between human activity and global warming.”
Views on the Kyoto Protocol
Izrael believes the Kyoto Protocol, an international treaty aimed at reducing global greenhouse gas emissions, is not scientifically supported and damaging for the Russian economy, stating, “the Kyoto Protocol is overly expensive, ineffective and based on bad science.”
Views on global warming
Izrael has stated, “climate change is obvious, but science has not yet been able to identify the causes of it,” and, “there is no proven link between human activity and global warming.” This seems to contrast the IPCC conclusion that “most of the observed increase in globally averaged temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely [confidence level >90%] due to the observed increase in anthropogenic [human] greenhouse gas concentrations.”
Izrael agrees with the IPCC predictions for future climate change, stating, “Global temperatures will likely rise by 1.4-5.8 degrees during the next 100 years. The average increase will be three degrees. I do not think that this threatens mankind. Sea levels, due to rise by 47 cm in the 21st century, will not threaten port cities.” He also states, “I think the panic over global warming is totally unjustified. There is no serious threat to the climate,” and, “There is no need to dramatize the anthropogenic impact, because the climate has always been subject to change under Nature’s influence, even when humanity did not even exist.” Additionally, he does not believe the 0.6 °C (1.08 °F) rise in temperature observed in the last 100 years is a threat, stating, “there is no scientifically sound evidence of the negative processes that allegedly begin to take place at such temperatures.”
Instead of decreasing carbon dioxide, he argues, aerosol injections in to the stratosphere would be a more effective way to mitigate global warming. He appears to favor adaption over mitigation, arguing, “The people of Bangladesh, who live at sea level, may face problems if the Indian Ocean rises. Still, their resettlement would be much cheaper than projected Kyoto Protocol expenses.”
Izrael was chairman of the State Committee on Hydrometeorology (Goskomgidromet) at the time of the Chernobyl nuclear accident. Following the accident he was widely criticized for slow and inaccurate monitoring. He was also criticized for allowing air pollution throughout the USSR to reach unprecedented levels. In a 2004 article published in Nature, Quirin Schiermeier and Bryon MacWilliams referred to him as a “fossil communist fighting for fossil fuel.”
Yuri hasn’t quite made up his mind- AGW is happening, vs it isn’t vs it is cheaper to mitigate vs climate has always changed. Quote mining will find some contradictions-
Global temperatures will likely rise by 1.4-5.8 degrees during the next 100 years. The average increase will be three degrees. I do not think that this threatens mankind. Sea levels, due to rise by 47 cm in the 21st century, will not threaten port cities
The G8 can adopt some effective climate-related decisions. In my opinion, academics, politicians and governments should assess maximum permissible temperatures and carbon-dioxide levels. Quite possibly, the world would have to sacrifice something in the face of a common threat.
One of Heartland Institute expert’s http://heartland.org/yuri-izrael
Harold Ambler. Who? Harold is an expert in climate science with an English Lit M.A. and a specialist in Beckett. His qualifications in everything but science can be found on his Linkedin page he is also a house husband [nothing wrong with that].
He produced one blog entry for the Huffington Post way back in 2009 that is probably an example of the very worst/best example in arguing that AGW is a hoax. Huffington Post blog article. The article drew more criticism for the Huff for choosing such a misinformed writer rather than simply providing a ‘skeptic’ voice. See here for Climate Crock of the Week entry. and a follow up article by staff writers at Huffington Post apologising and correcting the blog. [Huffington Post response]. The claim that he also wrote for the Wall St Journal is that the same post was reposted on their website.
Harold runs the blog talkingabouttheweather.wordpress.com with the strap line-
Climate change” is based on a lie: that climate used to be both stable and gentle. Nothing could be farther from the truth.
“You don’t need to be a right-wing SOB to think that ‘man made global warming’ is an Enron-style scam. Harold Ambler is a card-carrying liberal and he thinks so, too. He’s also very funny. Buy this book!” – James Delingpole, author ofWatermelons: The Green Movement’s True Colors