That the world is getting hotter and the climate is changing for the worse. And that it's our fault.
Ah. I see. So that's their contention. Fine. Let them contend it.
There is, however, an inconvenient truth out there... that there IS doubt, and it's coming from 650 scientists now, and that number is continuing to grow. That's a LOT OF DOUBT!
POZNAN, Poland - The UN global warming conference currently underway in Poland is about to face a serious challenge from over 650 dissenting scientists from around the globe who are criticizing the climate claims made by the UN IPCC and former Vice President Al Gore. Set for release this week, a newly updated U.S. Senate Minority Report features the dissenting voices of over 650 international scientists, many current and former UN IPCC scientists, who have now turned against the UN. The report has added about 250 scientists (and growing) in 2008 to the over 400 scientists who spoke out in 2007. The over 650 dissenting scientists are more than 12 times the number of UN scientists (52) who authored the media hyped IPCC 2007 Summary for Policymakers.The U.S. Senate report is the latest evidence of the growing groundswell of scientific opposition rising to challenge the UN and Gore. Scientific meetings are now being dominated by a growing number of skeptical scientists. The prestigious International Geological Congress, dubbed the geologists' equivalent of the Olympic Games, was held in Norway in August 2008 and prominently featured the voices and views of scientists skeptical of man-made global warming fears. [See Full report Here: & See: Skeptical scientists overwhelm conference: '2/3 of presenters and question-askers were hostile to, even dismissive of, the UN IPCC' ]
Provided are the names of some of these "skeptics" and what they've said:
“I am a skeptic…Global warming has become a new religion.” - Nobel Prize Winner for Physics, Ivar Giaever.
“Since I am no longer affiliated with any organization nor receiving any funding, I can speak quite frankly….As a scientist I remain skeptical.” - Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Joanne Simpson, the first woman in the world to receive a PhD in meteorology and formerly of NASA who has authored more than 190 studies and has been called “among the most preeminent scientists of the last 100 years.”
Warming fears are the “worst scientific scandal in the history…When people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists.” - UN IPCC Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning PhD environmental physical chemist.
“The IPCC has actually become a closed circuit; it doesn’t listen to others. It doesn’t have open minds… I am really amazed that the Nobel Peace Prize has been given on scientifically incorrect conclusions by people who are not geologists,” - Indian geologist Dr. Arun D. Ahluwalia at Punjab University and a board member of the UN-supported International Year of the Planet.
“The models and forecasts of the UN IPCC "are incorrect because they only are based on mathematical models and presented results at scenarios that do not include, for example, solar activity.” - Victor Manuel Velasco Herrera, a researcher at the Institute of Geophysics of the National Autonomous University of Mexico
“It is a blatant lie put forth in the media that makes it seem there is only a fringe of scientists who don’t buy into anthropogenic global warming.” - U.S Government Atmospheric Scientist Stanley B. Goldenberg of the Hurricane Research Division of NOAA.
“Even doubling or tripling the amount of carbon dioxide will virtually have little impact, as water vapour and water condensed on particles as clouds dominate the worldwide scene and always will.” – . Geoffrey G. Duffy, a professor in the Department of Chemical and Materials Engineering of the University of Auckland, NZ.
“After reading [UN IPCC chairman] Pachauri's asinine comment [comparing skeptics to] Flat Earthers, it's hard to remain quiet.” - Climate statistician Dr. William M. Briggs, who specializes in the statistics of forecast evaluation, serves on the American Meteorological Society's Probability and Statistics Committee and is an Associate Editor of Monthly Weather Review.
“For how many years must the planet cool before we begin to understand that the planet is not warming? For how many years must cooling go on?" - Geologist Dr. David Gee the chairman of the science committee of the 2008 International Geological Congress who has authored 130 plus peer reviewed papers, and is currently at Uppsala University in Sweden.
“Gore prompted me to start delving into the science again and I quickly found myself solidly in the skeptic camp…Climate models can at best be useful for explaining climate changes after the fact.” - Meteorologist Hajo Smit of Holland, who reversed his belief in man-made warming to become a skeptic, is a former member of the Dutch UN IPCC committee.
“Many [scientists] are now searching for a way to back out quietly (from promoting warming fears), without having their professional careers ruined.” - Atmospheric physicist James A. Peden, formerly of the Space Research and Coordination Center in Pittsburgh.
“Creating an ideology pegged to carbon dioxide is a dangerous nonsense…The present alarm on climate change is an instrument of social control, a pretext for major businesses and political battle. It became an ideology, which is concerning.” - Environmental Scientist Professor Delgado Domingos of Portugal, the founder of the Numerical Weather Forecast group, has more than 150 published articles.
“CO2 emissions make absolutely no difference one way or another….Every scientist knows this, but it doesn’t pay to say so…Global warming, as a political vehicle, keeps Europeans in the driver’s seat and developing nations walking barefoot.” - Dr. Takeda Kunihiko, vice-chancellor of the Institute of Science and Technology Research at Chubu University in Japan.
“The [global warming] scaremongering has its justification in the fact that it is something that generates funds.” - Award-winning Paleontologist Dr. Eduardo Tonni, of the Committee for Scientific Research in Buenos Aires and head of the Paleontology Department at the University of La Plata. # #
In addition, the report will feature new peer-reviewed scientific studies and analyses refuting man-made warming fears and a heavy dose of inconvenient climate developments. (See Below: Study: Half of warming due to Sun! –Sea Levels Fail to Rise? - Warming Fears in 'Dustbin of History')
You know, the IPCC must be remembered to be a creature of the corrupt, dishonest, delusional, arrogant "United Nations". Those who understand the truth about the United Nations understand that nothing the United Nations claims can be trusted, which is why Iraq was invaded to remove Saddam Hussein, and which is why Iran is now about to have nuclear weapons to use, as promised (what else has the capacity to wipe out entire nations and races???), against those the Islamofascist nation hates. The terrible record of that anachronistic international super-elitist's club cannot be sugarcoated. Oh, and it's also hopelessly corrupted by evil, controlled by evildoers in fancy suits pretending to be responsible world diplomats. Well, Chamberlain thought that Hitler was responsible. Many fools today think that the "Palestinian Authority" has some credibility... just because its "diplomats" such as Ismail Haniyeh and Abu "Mahmoud Abbas" Mazen wear fancy suits instead of murderers' getups. Russian new-cold-war tyrants Putin and Medvedev wear suits, too. The evil, murderous Chinese Communists wear suits. But wearing suits (and being treated as legitimate, responsible, rational world citizens by the in-denial-too, delusional corporate mainstream media) doesn't mean that they're ok; not at all.
But, hey, such is the nature of politics and international "diplomacy": Delusion, denial, pretending stuff is such that isn't. Don't you just hate the lies, and hate that the mainstream media treats the lies as if they're absolute truths which only "Big-Oil-paid" folks, "conspiracy theorists", liars and the insane would dare challenge?
Sort of like the lies of the IPCC and Al Gore. We know how folks have gotten treated who dared question the dogma of these uber-elitists. There have even been death threats against critics, for Heaven's sake! If those folks are so confident that they're right, why do they have to intimidate their critics so much, then?
Nevertheless, the "skeptics" are not going away, nor will they be silenced by the arrogant, dogmatic declaration that the exalted IPCC has finally, conclusively, smoking-gun-produced "proved it beyond all doubt".
You know, the arrogance of those bastards at the UN's IPCC should be seen while keeping in mind the debate over Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. I remember the skeptics back then and their knee-jerk repeated "prove it; make the case" demands of President Bush to prove it. Well, he didn't have to prove it, because there was plenty of evidence already for folks to be aware of, or to deny meant anything. C'mon- no one in their right mind believes that Saddam never had WMDs and understands that he was hiding them somehow, because all kinds of evidence pointed precisely in that direction, just like the IPCC's claimed (and very suspect, if one is aware of the truth about the temperature sensors they use to collect their data, and so much more stuff discovered about the whole collusive scam operation and how it works) "evidence" pointing them, allegedly, into the direction of their "now-with-100%-confidence" conclusion.
I say to the IPCC: BS!
And I'm not alone. Obviously. Just look at all those impressively-qualified scientists who've been looking at the evidence, too.
It's obvious to me that the whole thing is a big moneymaking scam and that its co-conspirators in the whole Big Lie will get away with it, probably with a few extra bucks in their pockets.
Who's going to prosecute them, anyway, after it becomes commonly accepted that the whole thing was a big pile of BS being shovelled in front of us by greedy characters who found a really, really clever way to take our money against our will, making the taxman look like an amateur?
