by Marc Morano
November 19, 2015
MIT Climate Scientist
Dr. Richard Lindzen:
'Demonization of CO2
is irrational at best and even modest warming is
'When someone says
this is the warmest temperature on record. What
are they talking about? It's just nonsense. This
is a very tiny change period.'
Princeton Physicist Dr.
'Policies to slow
CO2 emissions are really based on nonsense. We
are being led down a false path. To call carbon
dioxide a pollutant is really Orwellian. You are
calling something a pollutant that we all
produce. Where does that lead us eventually?'
Greenpeace Co-Founder Dr. Patrick Moore:
'We are dealing with
pure political propaganda that has nothing to do
NOTE: CFACT's new
Climate Hustle, is set to rock the UN climate
summit with red carpet' world premiere in Paris.
From Left to
Dr. Will Happer, Dr.
Richard Lindzen & Dr. Patrick Moore
A team of prominent scientists gathered
in Texas today at a climate summit to declare that fears of man-made
global warming were,
"irrational" and "based on nonsense" that "had
nothing to do with science."
They warned that,
"we are being led down
a false path" by the upcoming UN climate summit in Paris.
The scientists appeared
at a climate summit
sponsored by the Texas Public Policy Foundation. The summit in
Austin was titled: "At the Crossroads: Energy & Climate Policy
Climate Scientist Dr. Richard Lindzen,
an emeritus Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at the
Department of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences at MIT,
derided what he termed climate "catastrophism."
"Demonization of CO2
is irrational at best and even modest warming is mostly
beneficial," Lindzen said.
"The most important thing to keep in
mind is - when you ask 'is it warming, is it cooling', etc. - is
that we are talking about something tiny (temperature changes)
and that is the crucial point."
Lindzen also challenged the oft-repeated
UN IPCC claim that most of warming over past 50 years was due to
"People get excited over this. Is
this statement alarming? No," Lindzen stated.
"We are speaking of small changes
0.25 Celsius would be about 51% of the recent warming and that
strongly suggests a low and inconsequential climate sensitivity
- meaning no problem at all," Lindzen explained.
"I urge you when looking at a graph,
check the scales! The uncertainty here is tenths of a degree,"
"When someone points to this and
says this is the warmest temperature on record. What are they
talking about? It's just nonsense. This is a very tiny change
period. And they are arguing over hundredths of a degree when it
is uncertain in tenths of a degree," Lindzen said.
"And the proof that the uncertainty
is tenths of a degree are the adjustments that are being made.
If you can adjust temperatures to 2/10ths of a degree, it means
it wasn't certain to 2/10ths of a degree," he said.
"The UN IPCC wisely avoided making
the claim that 51% of a small change in temperature constitutes
a problem. They left this to the politicians and anyone who took
the bait," he said.
Lindzen noted that National
Academy of Sciences president Dr. Ralph Cicerone has even admitted
that there is no evidence for catastrophic claims of man-made global
Lindzen also featured 2006 quotes from
Scientist Dr. Miike Hulme, Professor of Environmental Sciences at
the University of East Anglia, and Director of the Tyndall Centre
for Climate Change Research, admitting that claims of a climate
catastrophe were not the "language of science."
discourse of catastrophe is a campaigning device,"
to the BBC in 2006.
"The language of
is not the language of science. To state that climate change
will be 'catastrophic' hides a cascade of value-laden
assumptions which do not emerge from empirical or theoretical
science," Hulme wrote.
any amount of climate change catastrophic? Catastrophic for
whom, for where, and by when? What index is being used to
measure the catastrophe?" Hulme continued.
Lindzen singled out Secretary of State
John Kerry for his 'ignorance' on science.
"John Kerry stands alone," Lindzen
said. "Kerry expresses his ignorance of what science is," he
Lindzen also criticized EPA Chief Gina
"I don't want to be snobbish, but U
Mass Boston is not a very good school," he said to laughter.
Lindzen concluded his talk by saying:
"Learn how to identify claims that
have no alarming implications and free to say 'So what?'"
Princeton Physicist Dr.
Will Happer, who has authored over 200 peer-reviewed papers, called
policies to reduce CO2 "based on nonsense."
"Policies to slow CO2 emissions are
really based on nonsense. They are all based on computer models
that do not work. We are being led down a false path.
"Our breath is not that different
from a power plant," he continued.
"To call carbon dioxide a pollutant
is really Orwellian. You are calling something a pollutant that
we all produce. Where does that lead us eventually?" he asked.
"Coal, formed from ancient CO2, is a
benefit to the world. Coal is CO2 from ancient atmospheres. We
are simply returning CO2 to the atmosphere from which it came
when you burn coal. And it's a good thing since it is at very
low levels in the atmosphere. We are in a CO2 famine. It is
very, very low," Happer explained.
"CO2 will be beneficial and crop
yields will increase."
"More CO2 will be a very significant
benefit to agriculture," he added.
Happer then showed a picture of polluted
air in China with the caption:
"Real pollution in Shanghai."
"If you can see it, it's not CO2,"
"If plants could vote, they would
vote for coal," Happer declared.
Happer also rebutted the alleged 97%
"97% of scientists have often been
wrong on many things," he said.
Ecologist and Greenpeace founding member Dr.
discussed the benefits of rising carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.
"Let's celebrate CO2!" Moore
"We know for absolute certain that
carbon dioxide is the stuff of life, the foundation for life on
earth," Moore said. "We are dealing with pure political
propaganda that has nothing to do with science," he continued.
"The deserts are greening from
rising CO2," he added. "CO2 has provided the basis of life
for at least 3.5 billion years," Moore said.