backtop


Print 218 comment(s) - last by Jedi2155.. on Jul 28 at 2:54 PM


Viscount Monckton gives a presentation during the 2007 Conference on Climate Change
"Considerable presence" of skeptics


Updated 7/17/2008

After publication of this story, the APS responded with a  statement that its Physics and Society Forum is merely one unit within the APS, and its views do not reflect those of the Society at large. 


The American Physical Society, an organization representing nearly 50,000 physicists, has reversed its stance on climate change and is now proclaiming that many of its members disbelieve in human-induced global warming.  The APS is also sponsoring public debate on the validity of global warming science.  The leadership of the society had previously called the evidence for global warming "incontrovertible."

In a posting to the APS forum, editor Jeffrey Marque explains,"There is a considerable presence within the scientific community of people who do not agree with the IPCC conclusion that anthropogenic CO2 emissions are very probably likely to be primarily responsible for global warming that has occurred since the Industrial Revolution."

The APS is opening its debate with the publication of a paper by Lord Monckton of Brenchley, which concludes that climate sensitivity -- the rate of temperature change a given amount of greenhouse gas will cause -- has been grossly overstated by IPCC modeling.   A low sensitivity implies additional atmospheric CO2 will have little effect on global climate.

Larry Gould, Professor of Physics at the University of Hartford and Chairman of the New England Section of the APS, called Monckton's paper an "expose of the IPCC that details numerous exaggerations and "extensive errors"

In an email to DailyTech, Monckton says, "I was dismayed to discover that the IPCC's 2001 and 2007 reports did not devote chapters to the central 'climate sensitivity' question, and did not explain in proper, systematic detail the methods by which they evaluated it. When I began to investigate, it seemed that the IPCC was deliberately concealing and obscuring its method." 

According to Monckton, there is substantial support for his results, "in the peer-reviewed literature, most articles on climate sensitivity conclude, as I have done, that climate sensitivity must be harmlessly low."

Monckton, who was the science advisor to Britain's Thatcher administration, says natural variability is the cause of most of the Earth's recent warming.   "In the past 70 years the Sun was more active than at almost any other time in the past 11,400 years ... Mars, Jupiter, Neptune’s largest moon, and Pluto warmed at the same time as Earth."



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: How many more nails?
By deadrats on 7/24/2008 12:48:39 PM , Rating: 2
BTW which is greater in mass

two hydrogen atoms or 1 helium atom genius?

lets see, you don't mention which isotopes, so let's assume you mean the most common one:

1 hydrogen-1 (the most comment hydrogen isotope) atom has an atomic mass of 1.007825u, 1 helium-4 atom (the most common helium isotope on earth) has an atomic mass of 4.002602u, and 1 hydrogen molecule has an average molecular mass of 2 x 1.007825u or 2015650u.

let me guess, you thought that 2 hydrogen atoms have the same atomic mass as 1 helium atom does, didn't you?

i guess you were absent on the day they taught fundamental chemistry as well.


RE: How many more nails?
By Jim28 on 7/25/2008 12:59:26 PM , Rating: 2
You still don't get it. And you don't read more than one post before you put your foot in your mouth.

6H << Helium4 2H
(6 * 1.07825) is less than (1 * 4.002602u) + (2*1.07825) + (subatomic particles) + (energy from mass conversion)

Another form is
4H = He4 + (subatomic particles) + (energy from mass conversion)

The above is the basic proton-proton fusion reaction. (More to it as the sub atomic particles are not listed explicity.)
As one He4 + the subatomic particles have less mass than 4 hydrogen atoms that difference in mass is what is converted to energy.

You prove again how dumb you are.


RE: How many more nails?
By dryer on 7/25/2008 1:30:35 PM , Rating: 2
Give it up Jim. I cannot believe that anybody with any sort of science education could make so many moronic statements about science. Therefore, I am left with only one conclusion to make: deadrats is an internet troll whose only purpose in life is to stir up trouble and insult other users.

Don't feed the trolls.


RE: How many more nails?
By Jim28 on 7/25/2008 3:29:05 PM , Rating: 2
You got it. I am done.


"Game reviewers fought each other to write the most glowing coverage possible for the powerhouse Sony, MS systems. Reviewers flipped coins to see who would review the Nintendo Wii. The losers got stuck with the job." -- Andy Marken














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki