jump to navigation

No scientific “consensus” about “global warming” May 27, 2009

Posted by honestclimate in Discussions.
Tags: ,

No scientific “consensus” about “global warming”


By Bob Ferguson and Lord Christopher Monckton, SPPI

WASHINGTON–(BUSINESS WIRE)—The Science and Public Policy Institute (SPPI) in Washington reports that a leading expert on climate and former advisor to Margaret Thatcher as UK Prime Minister, has dismissed as false a recent claim by the Washington Post that “most scientists now say there is a consensus about climate change”; that warming is “unequivocal”; and that most of the warming of the past century was manmade.

Christopher Monckton, in a new paper for SPPI entitled Unequivocal ‘Consensus’ on ‘Global Warming’, says:

“There is … no sound or scientific basis for the notion, peddled by the Washington Post, that there is a scientific ‘consensus’ to the effect that anthropogenic ‘global warming’ has occurred, is occurring, will occur, or, even if eventually it does occur, will be significant enough to be dangerous.”

The SPPI paper reveals the following facts that are usually overlooked or ignored –

>Science is not done by “consensus”: the argument from consensus is an instance of the Aristotelian logical fallacy known as the “head-count” fallacy.

>The decision by the UN’s climate panel to attribute more than half of the past 50 years’ warming to humankind was taken by an unscientific show of hands.

>The UN’s chapter attributing most of the past half century’s warming to humankind was rejected by most of the UN’s own official reviewers.

>The warming rate from 1975-1998, when humankind might have had some influence, was the same as the rate from 1860-1880 and from 1910-1940, when humankind’s influence was negligible.

>There is no anthropogenic signal at all in the global temperature record.

>For 15 years there has been no statistically-significant “global warming”.

>For 7.5 years there has been rapid but largely-unreported global cooling.

>The greatest warming rate in the past 300 years was from 1645 to 1715, before the Industrial Revolution began. That warming rate was eight times the 20th-century warming rate.

>The warming of the past 300 years is indeed unequivocal, but the mere fact of the warming tells us nothing of its cause. There is no scientific basis for attributing most of it to humankind.

>The notion that “2,500 scientists” personally agreed with the 2007 assessment report of the UN�s climate panel is nonsense.

>The largest-ever survey of scientific opinion – the largest to date – found more than 31,000 scientists did not consider the human contribution to “global warming” significant enough to be dangerous.

>Much of the UN’s reports are written by environmental campaigners, not scientists.

Robert Ferguson, SPPI’s president, said: “In a May 19 article by David Fahrenthold, yet again the Washington Post has been caught out publishing false science, selective data, and faulty conclusions. It is time that certain sections of the news media realized that, as every opinion poll shows, fewer and fewer of the public are any longer believing the politically-driven nonsense they write about ‘global warming’”.

Asks Ferguson, “Has the Washington Post resurrected former Post reporter Janet Cook?  Instead of fabricating an 8-year-old heroin addict, has Fahrenthold fabricated a “consensus” about global warming science?  Like Cook’s story, the Post’s report proves bereft of evidence and reality. On April 17, 1981, shortly after Cook and the Post were exposed, the New York Times editorialized, ‘When a reputable newspaper lies, it poisons the community; every newspaper story becomes suspect.’ We could not have said it better.  Even more tragically, these climate fantasies put at risk the economies and liberties of the Western World and the lives of many in the Third World. Where is the accountability?” See story here.



1. Jeremy - May 27, 2009

If you wanted a bridge built, would you ask an engineer, or a climate scientist?

Because I notice you’re still quoting the 31,000 strong petition project – That petition was signed by 10,000 engineers, and just 39 climatologists. (petitionproject.org)

98% of climate scientists, the people most likely to know, believe that human activity is causing climate change.

2. Jack - May 28, 2009

“If you wanted a bridge built, would you ask an engineer, or a climate scientist?”

I agree completely with your statement Jeremy. I expect you to advise Al Gore at once that he has no business in climate science. I also expect you to tell Pachuri who is an economist/railway engineer to step down from the IPCC. Let us know how ya go…

3. Jeremy - June 3, 2009

Absolutely, leave Al Gore to do the politics, and more to the point, the business. It’s high time you skeptics stopped harping on about Gore. You’re making yourselves look silly.

4. Jack - June 5, 2009

Jeremy, what did Pachuri say when you told him engineers have no business in climate science?

5. markau - June 5, 2009

I have looked high and low over the last few months – read all the IPCC reports – earnestly looking for any evidence to support AGW. I just can’t find anything solid to support the case. NOT ONE!!!

I think it is up to the people who support AGW to present proper evidence and not just make claims that, when looked into further, are just downright unfounded. “Settled science”, “Scientific consensus” , “The debate is settled” and all the name calling does not convince me. As far as I am concerned (and more and more people I talk to) AWF is unfounded hog wash -just a scheme to get the people to pay more. You are the ones pushing this and want support, so let’s see some evidence please!

6. Global Warming Hoax Weekly Round-Up, June 5th 2009 « The Daily Bayonet - October 2, 2010

[…] Consensus, what consensus? […]

7. Willie McDonald - February 24, 2011

The Global Warming Conspiracy
July 3, 1983

The real reason for global warming is the earth’s orbit around the sun is slowly decaying, and the earth elliptical orbit around the sun is shrinking. People take the earth’s magnetic field for granted, because it’s invisible, and silent, but the earth’s magnetic field keeps the earth at a safe distance from the sun, and the moon. The high temperature in the earth’s core (the earth’s engine) generates earth’s magnetic, and gravitational fields. The earth’s fuel system is referred to as crude oil, and natural gas wells. They are actually self pressurizing fuel cells, and crude oil, and natural gas are the earth’s fuel. The oil company’s crude oil extraction process compromises the earth’s fuel system, and shut off fuel to the earth’s outer core, by releasing pressure out of these oil, and gas wells. Under normal conditions the outer core stays at a constant temperature between 5000 to 7000 degrees celsius, and the pressure in the outer core, lower mantle, and in oil wells stays at tens of thousands of pounds per square inch. The pressure in an oil well forces the oil, and natural gas into the outer core, and is ignited long before it reaches the outer core, and enters the lower mantle, and outer core as flames, heat, and pressure.

The earth’s core is being fuel starved, and the core is slowly cooling. As the core cools the earth’s magnetic field will weakens, and the earth will be pulled closer to the sun. The high temperature in the earth’s core is not sustained by decaying nuclear material, or by a dynamo process. The radiation would escape during volcanic eruptions. No radiation has ever been detected during, or after a volcanic episode. Only crude oil, and natural gas by-products, such as the great pressures, carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide, and carbon monoxide gases, etc. The materials, and gases ejected from volcanoes originate from the lower mantle, and outer core region of the planet. Reference: Kenneth A. McGee, and Terrence M. Gerlach 1995/ Volcanic Gas: USGS Open files report -95-85, 2p.

The only way to reverse global warming is for the oil companies to re-pressurize the earth’s fuel systems. One way this can be accomplished is by igniting the methane gas in the fuel system. The ignited gas will expand, and create the pressure need to force the remaining crude oil, and natural gas into the outer core, and it will take many decades to reheat the core to normal temperatures. Crude oil, and methane gas was not created to fuel our industries, or automobiles. It was created to fuel this planet. Crude oil is the life blood of this planet.

Global warming has nothing to do with a hole in the ozone, Co2 gases, methane gases, the green house effect, sun flares, or the sun going nova. Tens of thousands of scientist believe the green house gas theory is false, this should be a cause for an alarm. Something is going wrong with the earth’s orbit. The events below are not separate events they are all part of earth’s orbital decay. The events below were reported by NASA/ Goddard Space Flight Center, NOAA, USGS, and the American Astronomical Society, etc.

1. The earth is moving away from the moon.

2. The rotation of the earth is slowing down.

3. The earth is shifting on its axis.

4. Twelve o’clock noon use to be the hot part of the day, now three o’clock is the hottest part of the day.

5. The earth is wobbling on it axis.

6. The earth is developing a breach in its magnetic field.

7. Both polar ice caps are being melted, one at a time, during each polar ice cap’s summer season, and the oceans are rising.

The sun is millions of times larger, than the earth. As the earth moves closer to the sun, its radiance will continue to spread, and began to warm areas of the planet that are in their winter season. Areas near the equator will be affected first. Areas near latitudes 29 degrees north, and south will experience higher, than normal temperatures during the winter, and it will began to get cold later in the season in these regions. These regions are where global warming should be monitored, first. The progression of the earth decaying orbit should be measured by the temperature in winter. The warmer, and/ or sunnier it gets the worse earth’s orbit is decaying, and the closer the earth is moving towards the sun. As the earth moves closer to the sun its irradiance will spread toward both hemisphere’s polar ice caps, starting from the equator, during the winter season. In the future there will be no more winters, because the sun’s irradiance will eventually spread, and covered both hemispheres simultaneously, while the hemisphere that’s in its summer season will experience extreme high temperatures. It’s December 16, 2010 the sun is over the southern hemisphere. Houston, Texas is in the northern hemisphere, and the winters days are getting sunnier, and warmer, and the cold weather is setting in later into the season. What is occurring in Houston, Texas will manifest in the rest of the world, in the future. Areas above latitude 29 degrees north, and south are now experiencing winter tornadoes, this is highly unusual. It should be too cold for the development of tornadoes, during the winter months. I have a few questions to ask of you green house gas theorists

1. What does sunny, and/ or warm winter days have to do with green house gases? There shouldn’t be enough irradiance from the sun for any green house gases to trap, during the winter months.

2. Why on a hot day is the sun irradiance higher, than the ambient temperature? The green house gas effect is suppose to causes the ambient temperature (the air around us) to be higher, than the sun irradiance, but if you stand under a shade tree the ambient temperature drops, move from under the shade tree into the sun’s irradiance the temperature rises. In an actual green house, or an automobile with the windows up the ambient temperature is higher, than the sun’s irradiance shining into the green house, or automobile.

3. Why in the early 20th century, during the industrial revolution in America, and Europe, wasn’t there a recorded dramatic spike in temperature? The north east region of America was referred to as the rust belt. This region was heavily industrialized, and heavily saturated with Co2, and methane gases. There were high numbers of respiratory cases, and stick smog, but there was no dramatic increase in temperature in America, or Europe. In the early 20th century scientists believed the earth was headed toward another ice age due to the harsh winter weather. Global warming wasn’t an issue, until the latter part of the 20th century, in spite of all the air pollution in the early 20th century. Global warming should have been an issue in the early 20th century in the rust belt region. The regions with the highest green house gases levels should have the highest temperatures, but this is not the case. The areas of the country that produce the most green house gas emissions should have the highest temperature, but this is not the case. Only global green house gas levels, and global temperatures increases are presented. People that believe in the green house gas theory think the pollution has to be global in order for the temperature to rise. The industrial activity in the rust belt has ended, and green house gases has been dramatically reduced, but the temperature in this area have not increase, or decrease, why?.

4. Television, radio, or news paper weather reports never mention the temperature of the sun’s irradiance. Generally the temperature of the sun’s irradiance is higher, than the ambient temperature, and the temperature of the ocean. Meteorologists, and green house gas theorist blame high pressure, low pressure, el-nino, the air flowing from the Gulf of Mexico for hot weather. They blame hot weather on everything, but the main cause, and that’s the increasing temperature of sun’s irradiance. Notice they don’t even try to differentiate between temperature of the sun’s irradiance, and the ambient temperature. They are also lying about the average/ normal temperature for winter. The average/ normal temperature for this region in winter is 40 to 50 degrees fahrenheit. They are saying 60 degrees fahrenheit is the average temperature, not 37 years ago. It’s the sun’s irradiance that heats the oceans, heat the surface of this planet, raises the ambient temperature, and it’s the sun’s irradiance that will be responsible for ending all life on this planet. They still treat the sun, and its irradiance as if it doesn’t exist, and the sun irradiance plays a major roll in our weather.

5. The E.P.A was established in December 2, 1970 to address the worsening air pollution (green house emissions), and the high number of respiratory cases, due to the illegal dumping of harmful chemicals in the air, underground, and in water ways. These harmful chemical were released by chemical companies, refineries, smelting plants, and steel mills. The E.P.A wasn’t established to address global warming. Global warming wasn’t an issue, until the 1990’s, in spite of all the air pollution, before the 1970’s, why?

6. Why is global warming predicted to worsen? Since the establishment of the EPA, the clean air act, and all the laws, and regulation pass by congress global warming in America should never be an issue. In spite of all the international clean air initiatives, and measures being taken global warming is still predicted to worsen, why?

7. Why are the most polluted cities, and countries of the world don’t have the highest temperature in summer. Places such as China, and Los Angeles, California, and Houston, Texas, and several countries in Europe generates the most green house gases in the world. The areas of the planet with the highest temperatures are the lease industrialized, such as the deserts of northern Africa, and the Southwest region of United States. Arizona, New Mexico, the northeastern part of Texas, and the state of Nevada have the highest temperatures in summer, why?

Mr. Willie McDonald

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: