by Steve Watson
December 10, 2008

from Infowars Website

Over 650 scientists have put their names to a US Senate Minority report that challenges the contention of the UN's International Panel on Climate Change that there is a scientific "consensus" on the causes of global warming.

Set to be released within the next 24 hours, the report features contributions from hundreds of prominent researchers, including current and former IPCC scientists, who are now speaking out in opposition of the UN's stance on climate change.

The Senate report is an updated version of a 2007 release, with over 250 more names added, highlighting how widespread dissent continues to grow in the scientific community to the alleged “consensus” that the modern warming is primarily man-made and is a crisis.

In comparison, twelve times fewer - just 52 scientists - participated in the much touted IPCC Summary for Policymakers meeting in April 2007. Climate scientists allied with the IPCC were recently caught citing fake data to make the case that global warming is accelerating.

The new Senate report will feature new peer-reviewed scientific studies and analyses refuting man-made warming fears.

Of course the fact that the establishment likes to engage in regular mass public deception by claiming the debate about global warming is over and any dissent is tantamount to holocaust denial doesn't bode well for potential media coverage of the report, unlike the ongoing UN climate conference in Poznan which is being lavished with endless media attention about the need for a global carbon tax to save the planet from the evils of plant food (CO²).

The self-proclaimed "consensus" behind man-made global warming is one enforced by threats, intimidation and ignorance, as highlighted by media coverage of last year's UN meeting in Bali, where skeptical climate scientists were shunned and ignored for daring to express an opposing viewpoint.

Following the Bali resolution to impose a global carbon tax, over one hundred prominent scientists signed a letter dismissing the move as a futile bureaucratic scheme which would diminish prosperity and increase human suffering.

Hundreds more skeptical scientists met in Manhattan last February at the first International Conference on Climate Change to discuss the side of the climate change debate that the establishment media prefers to pretend does not exist.

Did the mainstream media even acknowledge these events? Not at all, because they challenge the sacred cow that scientists uniformly agree on man-made global warming.

As we have previously reported, less than half of all published scientists endorse what has been dubbed the "consensus view".

However, President-elect Barack Obama yesterday vowed to end global warming "denial".

The following quotes, listed on the website of the US Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, provide a taster of what will be contained in the upcoming Senate report:

“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 vapor 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.

Definitive Proof

Majority Of Scientists Do Not Support Man Made Warming Theory

by Steve Watson
August 30, 2007

from Infowars Website

A new survey of over 500 peer reviewed scientific research papers on climate change, written between 2004 and 2007, has concluded that less than half endorse what has been dubbed the "consensus view," that human activity is contributing to considerable global climate change.

In direct conflict with assertions by the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that a scientific consensus agrees it is 90% likely that man is responsible for warming, Medical researcher Dr. Klaus-Martin Schulte's survey contends that only 45% support the theory and that is only if you include papers that merely lean towards endorsement.

Though the survey has not yet been released, the results have been submitted to the journal Energy and Environment, and science blog DailyTech has obtained a pre-publication copy which states:

Of 528 total papers on climate change, only 38 (7%) gave an explicit endorsement of the consensus. If one considers "implicit" endorsement (accepting the consensus without explicit statement), the figure rises to 45%. However, while only 32 papers (6%) reject the consensus outright, the largest category (48%) are neutral papers, refusing to either accept or reject the hypothesis. This is no "consensus."

The figures are even more shocking when one remembers the watered-down definition of consensus here.

Not only does it not require supporting that man is the "primary" cause of warming, but it doesn't require any belief or support for "catastrophic" global warming. In fact of all papers published in this period (2004 to February 2007), only a single one makes any reference to climate change leading to catastrophic results.

Man made warming proponents have often pointed to a similar survey that was conducted by history professor Naomi Oreskes on peer-reviewed papers published on the ISI Web of Science database from 1993 to 2003 which found that a majority of scientists supported the theory.

Dr. Klaus-Martin Schulte sought to update the research and according to DailyTech, used the same database and search terms as Oreskes but reached a radically different conclusion.

The introduction and the summary of the IPCC's report was written entirely by politicians under the mandate of the UN, the input of actual scientists was minimal. In addition, all sections that were written by selected scientists were edited to comply with the report summary.

Some of the scientists involved even admitted that the IPCC models failed to accurately predict climate change and that "none of the climate states in the models corresponds even remotely to the current observed climate".

By contrast, the ISI Web of Science database covers 8,700 journals and publications, including every leading scientific journal in the world and is not directly influenced by any governmental body.

Schulte's survey confirms the claim that the climate change momentum has shifted among prominent scientists who are now benefiting from a greater depth of research. A spate of new research papers has significantly chilled fears of global warming.

The new survey provides undeniable proof that the world is being sold a lie on climate change by a group of politicians and elite lobbyists who wish to seize on the opportunity to hype the global warming threat and use it as a means of social manipulation for political and corporate gain.

As we have extensively reported, it is the elites, the establishment and big business interests that are pushing these fears, not the scientific community.

People who still trust the platitudes of politicians and elitists who implore us to change our way of life, cough up more tax money, and get on board with the global warming religion save being linked with Holocaust denial, are as deluded and enslaved as the tribes of Mesoamerica who, unaware of the natural phenomenon of a solar eclipse, thought their high priests could make the sky snake eat the Sun, and therefore obeyed their every demand.

Politicians are professional liars, they make careers out of deceiving people and twisting reality to fit pre-conceived agendas, yet a cascade of otherwise rationally minded people are eager to blindly trust everything they have to say about climate change, no matter how delusional it sounds.

They are also willing to comply with the ridiculous overbearing "solutions" to climate change that will just coincidentally restrict mobility and freedom of travel, regulate personal behavior, empower and expand global government and reinvigorate the surveillance state - everything Big Brother ever wanted - but surely they wouldn't lie to us about global warming to achieve it, would they?