backtop


Print


Carbon dioxide, like water is essential to life on Earth and helps the planet enjoy rich plant life. However, some claim it is a threat to mankind. A report authored by two esteemed climatologists and backed by over 31,000 U.S. scientists challenges such theories put forth by the UN's "hobby climatologists".  (Source: Nedlands, AU)
New report authored by two esteemed weather scientists challenges AGW theory

The Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC) has issued a rebuttal to the United Nation's International Panel on Climate Change.  The report challenges the theory that man somehow has played a major role in changing the global climate, and also challenges the need to adopt painful and costly measures to combat this perceived threat, such as giving up meat in our diets.

Where many in the AGW community would have you believe that there is a consensus over global warming theory, the reports showcases the ongoing debate on the topic and support for alternative theories.  Over 31,478 American scientists signed a petition in the appendix citing “there is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate."

Unlike the UN's IPCC, which is chaired by Rajendra Pachauri, an Indian economist with no formal climatology training, the NIPCC is headed by two esteemed climatologists, each with a large body of work in the field.

The first coauthor of the report is Dr. S. Fred Singer, a former director of the U.S. Weather Satellite Service, now part of the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).  Dr. Singer received a U.S. Department of Commerce Gold Medal Award for his outstanding work in the field.  In the 1980s he continued to study the Earth's climate as the vice chairman of the National Advisory Committee for Oceans and Atmosphere (NACOA).  He also taught as a professor at University of Virginia.

Dr. Craig D. Idso also coauthored the report.  Dr. Idso has a Ph.D in geography from Arizona State University.  He has extensively studied the climate as a faculty researcher in the Office of Climatology at Arizona State University, and has published papers in the field of climatology.  He also lectured on Meteorology at Arizona State University.  His specialties include studying the growing season, the seasonal cycle of atmospheric CO2, world food supplies, coral reefs, and urban CO2 concentrations.

Among the conclusions reached by these esteemed researchers were that:

  • Climate models suffer from numerous deficiencies and shortcomings that could alter even the very sign (plus or minus, warming or cooling) of earth’s projected temperature response to rising atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) concentrations.
  • The model-derived temperature sensitivity of the earth--especially for a doubling of the preindustrial CO2 level--is much too large, and feedbacks in the climate system reduce it to values that are an order of magnitude smaller than what the IPCC employs.
  • Real-world observations do not support the IPCC’s claim that current trends in climate and weather are “unprecedented” and, therefore, the result of anthropogenic greenhouse gases.
  • The IPCC overlooks or downplays the many benefits to agriculture and forestry that will be accrued from the ongoing rise in the air’s CO2 content.
  • There is no evidence that CO2-induced increases in air temperature will cause unprecedented plant and animal extinctions, either on land or in the world’s oceans.
  • There is no evidence that CO2-induced global warming is or will be responsible for increases in the incidence of human diseases or the number of lives lost to extreme thermal conditions.

The pair, along with the 31,478 scientists backing their assertions, are urging lawmakers worldwide to carefully consider the body of evidence against AGW theory and lack of evidence in support of AGW theory.  Cutting carbon emissions by a mere 15 percent is estimated to cost $1,600 per U.S. citizen yearly and leave the nation $9.4 trillian poorer.  Totally forgoing carbon emissions could be extrapolated to cost the average citizen over $10,500 USD yearly.  And Dr. Idso and Dr. Singer provide compelling evidence that this would be a pointless and foolhardy sacrifice as it would have virtually no affect on the climate.





"This week I got an iPhone. This weekend I got four chargers so I can keep it charged everywhere I go and a land line so I can actually make phone calls." -- Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg










Latest Blog Posts
Amazon Fire HD 8
Nenfort Golit - Jun 19, 2017, 6:00 AM






botimage
Copyright 2017 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki