Majority Press Release
Decorated Scientist Defects From Belief in Global Warming – Caps Year of Vindication for Skeptics
October 17, 2006
Washington DC – One of the most decorated French geophysicists has converted from a believer in manmade catastrophic global warming to a climate skeptic. This latest defector from the global warming camp caps a year in which numerous scientific studies have bolstered the claims of climate skeptics. Scientific studies that debunk the dire predictions of human-caused global warming have continued to accumulate and many believe the new science is shattering the media-promoted scientific “consensus” on climate alarmism.
This is a lengthy post,
Claude Allegre, a former government official and an active member of France’s Socialist Party, wrote an editorial on September 21, 2006 in the French newspaper L’Express titled “The Snows of Kilimanjaro” detailing his newfound skepticism about manmade global warming. See: www.lexpress.fr/idees/tribunes/dossier/allegre/dossier.asp?ida=451670 Allegre wrote that the “cause of climate change remains unknown” and pointed out that Kilimanjaro is not losing snow due to global warming, but to local land use and precipitation changes. Allegre also pointed out that studies show that Antarctic snowfall rate has been stable over the past 30 years and the continent is actually gaining ice.
“Following the month of August experienced by the northern half of France, the prophets of doom of global warming will have a lot on their plate in order to make our fellow countrymen swallow their certitudes,” Allegre wrote. He also accused proponents of manmade catastrophic global warming of being motivated by money, noting that “the ecology of helpless protesting has become a very lucrative business for some people!”
Allegre, a member of both the French and U.S. Academy of Sciences, had previously expressed concern about manmade global warming. “By burning fossil fuels, man enhanced the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere which has raised the global mean temperature by half a degree in the last century,” Allegre wrote 20 years ago. In addition, Allegre was one of 1500 scientists who signed a November 18, 1992 letter titled “World Scientists’ Warning to Humanity” in which the scientists warned that global warming’s “potential risks are very great.” See: homepages.ihug.co.nz/~sai/sciwarn.html
Allegre has authored more than 100 scientific articles, written 11 books and received numerous scientific awards including the Goldschmidt Medal from the Geochemical Society of the United States.
Allegre’s conversion to a climate skeptic comes at a time when global warming alarmists have insisted that there is a “consensus” about manmade global warming. Proponents of global warming have ratcheted up the level of rhetoric on climate skeptics recently. An environmental magazine in September called for Nuremberg-style trials for global warming skeptics and CBS News “60 Minutes” correspondent Scott Pelley compared skeptics to “Holocaust deniers.” See: www.epw.senate.gov/fact.cfm?party=rep&id=264568 & www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2006/03/22/publiceye/entry1431768.shtml In addition, former Vice President Al Gore has repeatedly referred to skeptics as “global warming deniers.”
This increase in rhetorical flourish comes at a time when new climate science research continues to unravel the global warming alarmists’ computer model predictions of future climatic doom and vindicate skeptics.
60 Scientists Debunk Global Warming Fears
Earlier this year, a group of prominent scientists came forward to question the so-called “consensus” that the Earth faces a “climate emergency.” On April 6, 2006, 60 scientists wrote a letter to the Canadian Prime Minister asserting that the science is deteriorating from underneath global warming alarmists.
“Observational evidence does not support today’s computer climate models, so there is little reason to trust model predictions of the future…Significant [scientific] advances have been made since the [Kyoto] protocol was created, many of which are taking us away from a concern about increasing greenhouse gases. If, back in the mid-1990s, we knew what we know today about climate, Kyoto would almost certainly not exist, because we would have concluded it was not necessary,” the 60 scientists wrote. See: www.canada.com/nationalpost/financialpost/story.html?id=3711460e-bd5a-475d-a6be-4db87559d605
“It was only 30 years ago that many of today’s global-warming alarmists were telling us that the world was in the midst of a global-cooling catastrophe. But the science continued to evolve, and still does, even though so many choose to ignore it when it does not fit with predetermined political agendas,” the 60 scientists concluded.
In addition, an October 16, 2006 Washington Post article titled “Climate Change is Nothing New” echoed the sentiments of the 60 scientists as it detailed a new study of the earth’s climate history. The Washington Post article by reporter Christopher Lee noted that Indiana University geologist Simon Brassell found climate change occurred during the age of dinosaurs and quoted Brassell questioning the accuracy of computer climate model predictions.
“If there are big, inherent fluctuations in the system, as paleoclimate studies are showing, it could make determining the Earth’s climatic future even harder than it is,” Brassell said. See: www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/15/AR2006101500672.html
Global Cooling on the Horizon?
In August, Khabibullo Abdusamatov, a scientist who heads the space research sector for the Russian Academy of Sciences, predicted long-term global cooling may be on the horizon due to a projected decrease in the sun’s output. See: en.rian.ru/russia/20060825/53143686.html
Sun’s Contribution to Warming
There have also been recent findings in peer-reviewed literature over the last few years showing that the Antarctic is getting colder and the ice is growing and a new 2006 study in Geophysical Research Letters found that the sun was responsible for up to 50% of 20th-century warming. See: www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2006/2006GL027142.shtml
“Global Warming” Stopped in 1998
Paleoclimate scientist Bob Carter has noted that there is indeed a problem with global warming – it stopped in 1998. “According to official temperature records of the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia in the UK, the global average temperature did not increase between 1998-2005. “…this eight-year period of temperature stasis did coincide with society’s continued power station and SUV-inspired pumping of yet more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere,” noted paleoclimate researcher and geologist Bob Carter of James Cook University in Australia in an April 2006 article titled “There is a problem with global warming… it stopped in 1998.” See: www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2006/04/09/do0907.xml&sSheet=/news/2006/04/09/ixworld.html
“Global”? Warming Misnamed – Southern Hemisphere Not Warming
In addition, new NASA satellite tropospheric temperature data reveals that the Southern Hemisphere has not warmed in the past 25 years contrary to “global warming theory” and modeling. This new Southern Hemisphere data raises the specter that the use of the word “global” in “global warming” may not be accurate. A more apt moniker for the past 25 years may be “Northern Hemisphere” warming. See: motls.blogspot.com/2006/09/southern-hemisphere-ignores-global.html
Alaska Cooling
According to data released on July 14, 2006 from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the January through June Alaska statewide average temperature was “0.55F (0.30C) cooler than the 1971-2000 average.” See: www.publicaffairs.noaa.gov/releases2006/jul06/noaa06-065.html
Oceans Cooling
Another bombshell to hit the global warming alarmists and their speculative climate modeling came in a September article in the Geophysical Research Letters which found that over 20% of the heat gained in the oceans since the mid-1950s was lost in just two years. The former climatologist for the state of Colorado, Roger Pielke, Sr., noted that the sudden cooling of the oceans “certainly indicates that the multi-decadal global climate models have serious issues with their ability to accurately simulate the response of the climate system to human- and natural-climate forcings.” See: climatesci.atmos.colostate.edu/2006/09/
Light Hurricane Season & Early Winter
Despite predictions that 2006 would bring numerous tropical storms, 2006’s surprisingly light hurricane season and the record early start of this year’s winter in many parts of the U.S. have further put a damper on the constant doomsaying of the global warming alarmists and their media allies.
Droughts Less Frequent
Other new studies have debunked many of the dubious claims made by the global warming alarmists. For example, the claim that droughts would be more frequent, severe and wide ranging during global warming, has now being exposed as fallacious. A new paper in Geophysical Research Letters authored by Konstantinos Andreadis and Dennis Lettenmaier finds droughts in the U.S. becoming “shorter, less frequent and cover a small portion of the country over the last century.” www.worldclimatereport.com/index.php/2006/10/13/where-are-the-droughts
Global Warming Will Not Lead to Next Ice Age
Furthermore, recent research has shown that fears that global warming could lead to the next ice age, as promoted in the 2004 Hollywood movie “The Day After Tomorrow” are also unsupportable. A 2005 media hyped study “claimed to have found a 30 percent slowdown in the thermohaline circulation, the results are published in the very prestigious Nature magazine, and the story was carried breathlessly by the media in outlets around the world…Less than a year later, two different research teams present convincing evidence [ in Geophysical Research Letters ] that no slowdown is occurring whatsoever,” according to Virginia State Climatologist Patrick Michaels, editor of the website World Climate Report. See: www.worldclimatereport.com/index.php/2006/10/13/overturning-ocean-hype
‘Hockey Stick’ Broken in 2006
The “Hockey Stick” temperature graph’s claim that the 1990’s was the hottest decade of the last 1000 years was found to be unsupportable by the National Academy of Sciences and many independent experts in 2006. See: www.epw.senate.gov/pressitem.cfm?party=rep&id=257697
Study Shows Greenland’s Ice Growing
A 2005 study by a scientist named Ola Johannessen and his colleagues showed that the interior of Greenland is gaining ice mass. See: www.co2science.org/scripts/CO2ScienceB2C/articles/V8/N44/C1.jsp that Also, according to the International Arctic Research Institute, despite all of the media hype, the Arctic was warmer in the 1930’s than today.
Polar Bears Not Going Extinct
Despite Time Magazine and the rest of the media’s unfounded hype, polar bears are not facing a crisis, according to biologist Dr. Mitchell Taylor from the Arctic government of Nunavut. “Of the 13 populations of polar bears in Canada, 11 are stable or increasing in number. They are not going extinct, or even appear to be affected at present,” Taylor wrote on May 1, 2006. See: www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1146433819696&call_pageid=970599119419
Media Darling James Hansen Hypes Alarmism
As all of this new data debunking climate alarmism mounts, the mainstream media chooses to ignore it and instead focus on the dire predictions of the number-one global warming media darling, NASA’s James Hansen. The increasingly alarmist Hansen is featured frequently in the media to bolster sky-is-falling climate scare reports. His recent claim that the Earth is nearing its hottest point in one million years has been challenged by many scientists. See: www.co2science.org/scripts/CO2ScienceB2C/articles/V9/N39/EDITB.jsp Hansen’s increasingly frightening climate predictions follow his 2003 concession that the use of “extreme scenarios” was an appropriate tactic to drive the public’s attention to the urgency of global warming. See: naturalscience.com/ns/articles/01-16/ns_jeh6.html Hansen also received a $250,000 grant form Teresa Heinz’s Foundation and then subsequently endorsed her husband John Kerry for President and worked closely with Al Gore to promote his movie, “An Inconvenient Truth.” See: www.heinzawards.net/speechDetail.asp?speechID=6 & www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/dai_complete.pdf
American People Rejecting Global Warming Alarmism
The global warming alarmists may have significantly overplayed their hand in the climate debate. A Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll this August found that most Americans do not attribute the cause of any recent severe weather events to global warming, and the portion of Americans who believe that climate change is due to natural variability has increased over 50% in the last five years.
Senator Inhofe Chastises Media For Unscientific & Unprincipled Climate Reporting
Senator James Inhofe (R-Okla.) Chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee, commented last week on the media’s unfounded global warming hype and some of the recent scientific research that is shattering the so-called “consensus” that human greenhouse gas emissions have doomed the planet.
“The American people are fed up with media for promoting the idea that former Vice President Al Gore represents the scientific ‘consensus’ that SUV’s and the modern American way of life have somehow created a ‘climate emergency’ that only United Nations bureaucrats and wealthy Hollywood liberals can solve. It is the publicity and grant seeking global warming alarmists and their advocates in the media who have finally realized that the only “emergency” confronting them is their rapidly crumbling credibility, audience and bottom line. The global warming alarmists know their science is speculative at best and their desperation grows each day as it becomes more and more obvious that many of the nations that ratified the woeful Kyoto Protocol are failing to comply,” Senator Inhofe said last week. See: www.epw.senate.gov/pressitem.cfm?party=rep&id=264616
“The mainstream media needs to follow the money: The further you get from scientists who conduct these alarmist global warming studies, and the further you get from the financial grants and the institutions that they serve the more the climate alarmism fades and the skepticism grows,” Senator Inhofe explained.
Eco-Doomsayers’ Failed Predictions
In a speech on the Senate floor on September 25, 2006, Senator Inhofe pointed out the abject failure of past predictions of ecological disaster made by environmental alarmists.
“The history of the modern environmental movement is chock-full of predictions of doom that never came true. We have all heard the dire predictions about the threat of overpopulation, resource scarcity, mass starvation, and the projected death of our oceans. None of these predictions came true, yet it never stopped the doomsayers from continuing to predict a dire environmental future. The more the eco-doomsayers’ predictions fail, the more the eco-doomsayers predict,” Senator Inhofe said on September 25th. See: epw.senate.gov/speechitem.cfm?party=rep&id=263759
Related Links:
For a comprehensive review of the media’s embarrassing 100-year history of alternating between promoting fears of a coming ice age and global warming, see Environment & Public Works Chairman James Inhofe’s September 25, 2006 Senate floor speech debunking the media and climate alarmism. Go to: (epw.senate.gov/speechitem.cfm?party=rep&id=263759)
To read and watch Senator Inhofe on CNN discuss global warming go to: (www.epw.senate.gov/pressitem.cfm?party=rep&id=264308 )
To Read all of Senator Inhofe’s Speeches on global warming go to: (epw.senate.gov/speeches.cfm?party=rep)
“Inhofe Correct On Global Warming,” by David Deming geophysicist, an adjunct scholar with the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs (ocpathink.org), and an associate professor of Arts and Sciences at the University of Oklahoma. (epw.senate.gov/fact.cfm?party=rep&id=264537)
Contact: MARC MORANO (202) 224-5762 (marc_morano@epw.senate.gov), MATT DEMPSEY (202) 224-9797 (matthew_dempsey@epw.senate.gov)
My only quibble would be that I do not believe the American people are rejecting AGW alarmism. They have en masse embraced the “climate science” orthodoxy and will continue to approve draconian restrictions on CO2 emissions as well as other yet to be determined “controls” on the fossil fuel industry. I pray to be proven wrong, but strongly suspect I am right.
Arctic temperatures of the 20th century showed a warming phase to the 1940’s, a cooling phase to the 1970’s and renewed warming to 2003. A recent experiment at the Danish National Space Centre may explain why.
www.junkscience.com/MSU_Temps/Arctic.htm
The temperatures trends in the Arctic reflect the warming and cooling periods seen in the global surface temperature record. These periods mirror shifting phases of the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO), a natural climate phenomenon that has been traced back in trees and coral for more than 400 years. The divergent climate states were first discerned in arctic fisheries in 1996 but have since been discovered in changing abundances of anchovies and sardines in Monterey Bay (having given rise to John Steinbeck’s novel Cannery Row) and in Australian multi-decadal rainfall trends (long periods of persistent droughts or long periods of persistent floods).
(jisao.washington.edu/pdo/
The divergent states are the warm and cool phases of the PDO. A cool phase brings persistent La Nina conditions over a few decades (more summer rainfall in Australia) and reduced global temperatures (fewer El Ninos). The alternating phases last for 20 to 30 years. The last warm phase of the PDO (1975 to 1998) produced between 1976 and 1977 a 0.50C rise in the temperature of the lower atmosphere.
(www.worldclimatereport.com/index.php/2004/08/09/non-linear-climate-change/ – see Figure 2 especially).
Australia has good flood records going back more than 100 years. It has been known for some time that Australia experiences decades long periods of extended drought and, alternatively, decades long periods of flooding. These periods coincide with the temperature record of the last century. The period of rising temperature to the mid 1940’s saw drought, the period to 1975 was a wet period and then dry again to – well – now.
Recent flood analysis suggests that the phenomenon is a result of long term modulation of both the frequency and intensity La Nina and El Nino events in the El Nino Southern Oscillation. There is a direct relationship between increasing frequency and intensity of El Nino and higher global temperatures.
The indication from increasing negativity of the PDO index since 1998 is that the PDO has shifted phase – this is supported by other observations. The lack of an increase in global temperature since 1998 suggests that the effect of a ‘cool phase’ of the PDO is being felt. The effect will last for decades and will moderate global warming – although I am still waiting for the rain to fall.
This is not to suggest that carbon dioxide does not impose a rising temperature trend on a background of naturally variable climate. Simply, that GHG alone are insufficient to account for climate variation over the last century.
The powerful climate signal of the PDO is not included in the climate models because, quite simply, there is no agreed explanation for the observed phenomenon. Although this seems a trifle theoretical when confronted with real world observations – it was assumed that the background variations were chaotic and unpredictable when in fact they are cyclical and predictable.
An explanation for the phenomenon might be found in a physical link between cosmic radiation and cloud formation suggested in work done at the Danish National Space Centre and published in the Proceedings of the Royal Society this month (October 2006). The ‘Sky’ (Danish for clouds) experiment appears to show that ionized radiation promotes sulphate nucleation in the atmosphere and, consequently, can enhance cloud formation. More radiation means more low level clouds and a cooler planet and the amount of cosmic radiation reaching the atmosphere is directly linked to solar activity. More solar activity increases magnetic shielding of the earth reducing the amount of radiation hitting the atmosphere and reducing cloud formation.
The connection between solar magnetism and climate remains to be demonstrated conclusively. However, the trends of solar magnetism, sunspots and clouds, and the apparent correlation with past climate change, are certainly intriguing.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunspots
www.ngdc.noaa.gov/stp/GEOMAG/aastar.shtml
I do not endorse continually increasing the concentrations of GHG in the atmosphere. There are serious problems with this course of action even with a significant moderation of global warming.
Something definitely shifted in 1998 (although there were some early hints of the pending shift in the winters of 94 – 95, 96 – 97 and 97 – 98). Here in the mid West Coast of the US, we’ve had a series of late springs and overall weak summers. During the “great Western drought” of the early naugties, we had surplus rain / snow meanwhile anything east of Nevada was parched.
As for the Arctic, in 2003 they had a year without a Summer. 04 and 05 had pretty low extent minimums for the entire hemisphere, but this year was only just below “normal” with a very rapid rebound after the minimum in August.
I’m not going to go through every one of these headlines, but the two that jumped out to me…
“60 Scientists Debunk Global Warming Fears”
Sure, they have a different view from the IPCC report from over 2500 scientific expert reviews, 800 contributing authors and 450 lead authors from 130 countries, but I hardly think they “debunk” anything. They raise some good points, such as: “The study of global climate change is, as you have said, an “emerging science,” one that is perhaps the most complex ever tackled. It may be many years yet before we properly understand the Earth’s climate system.” However, to use this open letter as a means to debunk global warming theories is casting a long bow.
50% of Americans rejecting alarmism?
I’d like to see the sample size and questions asked by the Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg to divine that number. Not to attack Americans, but they hardly have a reputation for being informed about anything outside their country’s borders.
Climate change researchers are not infallible by any means. There are so many variables to deal with in this area that predictions can always be questioned. Some may prove to be wrong, but it’s the ones that turn out to be right that worry me. The way we humans live has had, and is increasingly having a detrimental effect on the world we live in. Do people really think we can burn so much coal and oil, cut down forests and overfish without changing anything?
Reading the IPCC report and its realistic projections leaves me not alarmed, but more secure in the belief that we as humans need to change the way we live to better respect the ecology of the world we live in. I just don’t understand how anyone could argue that we are not adversely effecting the environment.
I don’t even see how global warming “alarmism” is a bad thing. People need to wake up and realise that we are destroying our world, and alarmism is what it takes to get people’s attention these days. This doesn’t mean that they will rush out and start protesting coal exports or tear down polluting corporations with their nails, but if it encourages people to put more effort into sustainable ways of living then what is wrong with that?
It won’t cause economic ruin like so many sceptics seem to think. It won’t even destroy our capitalistic society. Switching to renewable energy, recycling more and using less fossil fuels may kill off certain industries but in a free market new businesses based around sustainability will immediately spring up to replace the old.
And frankly, like it or not, the oil will run out soon enough anyway, so what is stopping us from starting the move to renewables right now?
Greg
“And frankly, like it or not, the oil will run out soon enough anyway, so what is stopping us from starting the move to renewables right now?”
BECAUSE WE ARE BEING FORCED TOO BY HALF TRUTHS AND LIES THAT’S WHY…
“I don’t even see how global warming “alarmism” is a bad thing. People need to wake up and realise that we are destroying our world, and alarmism is what it takes to get people’s attention these days. This doesn’t mean that they will rush out and start protesting coal exports or tear down polluting corporations with their nails, but if it encourages people to put more effort into sustainable ways of living then what is wrong with that? ”
WE’RE DESTROYING THE WORLD?? BY WHAT?? BURNING FOSIL FUELS? BREATHING, EATHING, LIVING?? DO YOU REALIZE YOUR EXISTANCE (AND OURS) IS OF BREATH TAKING INSIGNIFICANCE?!
YOU CANNOT DISPUTE THE FACT THAT WITHOUT FOSIL FUELS WE WOULD NOT HAVE THE LUXURIES AND LIFE STYLES WE TAKE FOR GRANTED TODAY…
SUSTAINABLE ENERGIES ARE ALREADY AVAILABLE BUT THE LIKES OF AL GORE, GREEN PEACE, FREINDS OF EARTH ETC….REFUSE TO EVEN ACKNOWLEDGE IT! WHAT DO YOU SUGGEST? WIND FARMS IN YOUR BACK YARD? ETHONOL??? THAT’S A JOKE AND WE ARE DESTROYING OUR ECONOMY AND EARTH BY DRASTIC AND QUICK TO PUSH SOLLUTIONS THAT NEED TO BE TESTED FURTHER BEFORE WE JUMP IN HEAD FIRST.
DO YOU REALIZE FORESTS ARE THE MOST ABUNDANT RENEWABLE RESOURCE ON THE PLANET AT PRESENT? THEY GROW BACK…IF WE DONT RE-GROW DESIGNATED FORESTS FOR THAT THEN THIS I HAVE ISSUES WITH BECAUSE I LOVE MY PLANET AND I LOVE MY LIBERTIES
now that I think about it, you sound familiar; I’ve heard these arguments before…your ‘free market’ idea sounds to like the carbon cap & trade, not to mention Gores’ hedge fund company’s huge investments in ‘renewable energies’ NOPE, no agenda there right?