22.03.2014 Views

U. S. Senate Minority Report: - Klimaforschung

U. S. Senate Minority Report: - Klimaforschung

U. S. Senate Minority Report: - Klimaforschung

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Frank Wachowski, a retired atmospheric scientist for the National Weather Service,<br />

rejected the notion of a consensus about global warming in 2008. “The jury is still out,”<br />

Wachowski said, according to a March 19, 2008 article. “Obviously, it appears that the<br />

Arctic is getting warmer and causing problems for polar bears and other animals. But are<br />

we doing it? It has become a big political issue,” Wachowski explained. “We don’t have a<br />

long-enough period to study yet…everything goes through cycles,” he concluded. (LINK)<br />

U.S. Government Atmospheric Scientist Stanley B. Goldenberg of the Hurricane<br />

Research Division of NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) in<br />

Miami strongly protested the notion that most scientists agree with man-made climate<br />

change theories in 2008. “It is a blatant lie put forth in the media that makes it seem there is<br />

only a fringe of scientists who don’t buy into anthropogenic global warming,” Goldenberg<br />

said on August 18, 2008. “Not all scientists agree that the warming we’ve seen is<br />

necessarily anthropogenic,” Goldenberg added. “There are those who want to attribute any<br />

perceived increase in natural disasters to anthropomorphic global warming. I predict that if<br />

we have an active hurricane season, someone will attribute it to AGW. They’re not really<br />

looking at the science; they’re looking at the disaster,” he added. Goldenberg also praised<br />

the skeptical climate change conference in New York City in March 2008. “The fact is that<br />

this conference is evidence that there are numerous respected, established and in many<br />

cases world-renowned scientists who have done careful research in various areas of<br />

‘climate change’ that sharply differ with the [UN] IPCC results,” Goldenberg told the New<br />

York Times. (LINK) (LINK)<br />

Mechanical Engineer Dan Pangburn, a licensed engineer with master in Mechanical<br />

Engineering and author of a climate research paper, dissented in 2008. “For most of<br />

earth’s history carbon dioxide level has been several times higher than the present,”<br />

Pangburn wrote in his paper on March 15, 2008. “The conclusion from all this is that<br />

carbon dioxide change does NOT cause significant climate change. Actions to control the<br />

amount of non-condensing greenhouse gases that are added to the atmosphere are based on<br />

the mistaken assumption that global warming was caused by human activity,” he added.<br />

(LINK)<br />

Physicist and engineer Dr. Jeffrey A. Glassman, a former Division Chief Scientist for<br />

Hughes Aircraft Company, is an expert modeler of microwave and millimeter wave<br />

propagation in the atmosphere solar radiation, thermal energy in avionics. Glassman<br />

has conducted several studies on CO2 and climate including a July 6, 2007, paper titled,<br />

“Solar Wind has Twice the Global Warming Effect of El Niño.” Glassman is blunt, writing,<br />

“The consensus of climate mistakenly attributes solar wind warming to man-made carbon<br />

dioxide.” Glassman has researched ice core data and concluded, “CO2 concentration is a<br />

response to the proxy temperature in the Vostok ice core data, not a cause. This does not<br />

contradict that CO2 is a greenhouse gas, but it does contradict the conjecture that the<br />

presence of a greenhouse gas has any destabilizing effect on global climate. Other forces<br />

overwhelm the conjecture of a runaway greenhouse effect. The concentration of CO2 is<br />

dynamic, controlled by the solubility pump. Global temperature is controlled first by the<br />

primary thermodynamic loop.” Glassman concluded, “The Vostok data support an entirely<br />

new model. Atmospheric CO2 is absorbed by the oceans. Fires, volcanoes, and now man<br />

deposit CO2 into the atmosphere, but those effects are transient. What exists in steady state<br />

is CO2 perpetually pumped into the atmosphere by the oceans. Atmospheric CO2 is a<br />

46

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!