Than 1000 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global ...

Mathematical Physicist Dr. Frank Tipler, professor at Tulane University who has
authored 58 peer-reviewed publications and five books, dissented from man-made
climate fears. ―It is obvious that anthropogenic global warming is not science at all,
because a scientific theory makes non-obvious predictions which are then compared with
observations that the average person can check for himself,‖ Tipler wrote on December 22,
2008. ―As we both know from our own observations, AGW theory has spectacularly failed
to do this. The theory has predicted steadily increasing global temperatures, and this has
been refuted by experience. Now the global warmers claim that the Earth will enter a
cooling period. In other words, whether the ice caps melt, or expand --- whatever happens -
-- the AGW theorists claim it confirms their theory. A perfect example of a pseudo-science
like astrology,‖ Tipler continued. ―If a guy agrees with AGW (Anthropogenic Global
Warming), then he can get a government contract. If he is a skeptic, then no contract.
There is a professor at Tulane, with a Ph.D in paleoclimatology, who is as skeptical as I
am about AGW, but he'd never be considered for tenure at Tulane because of his
professional opinion. No government contracts, no tenure,‖ Tipler added. (LINK) (LINK)
(LINK) (LINK)
Professor Dr. Caleb Stewart Rossiter, an adjunct professor at the School of
International Service at American University and a long-time teacher of statistical
modeling, rejected the certainty of man-made warming claims in 2009. ―It is noteworthy
that all paleo-climatologists agree that at the high and low end of the recurring 100,000
year cycles in which global mean temperature moves as much as 20 degrees, it is
temperature that changes direction first, followed in a few hundred years by carbon dioxide
concentration. These cycles of temperature are perfectly correlated with the oscillation of
the earth's orbit around the sun from a circle to a 5 percent ellipse, although no convincing
mechanism has been identified for how the change in the orbit could significantly change
the solar power that gets to earth,‖ Rossiter wrote in an essay titled ―Global Warming Far
from Fact‖ on February 16, 2009. ―The lack of understanding of a powerful physical
mechanism that has generated a 20-degree rise in temperature over the past 20,000 years
makes it difficult to accept the IPCC's claim - on the third step - that the lack of other
identifiable mechanisms for the much more modest rise in temperature in the past 150
years means that the sole culprit is human production of heat-trapping gases. For me there
is not enough proof to justify what I fear will be the outcome of the post-Kyoto emissions
negotiations: the developed countries will stampede developing countries into reducing the
carbon output they need to keep economies growing and life expectancy increasing,‖
Rossiter added. ―The IPCC reports that for millions of years the concentration in the
atmosphere of the primary heat-trapping gas, carbon dioxide, has moved in close
correlation with global mean temperature. It also estimates that since 1860 this
concentration has increased from 280 to 380 parts per million as global mean temperature
has risen by one degree. Fine so far. However, since we have only one earth to experiment
on, which is not much of a sample size for testing climate hypotheses, the IPCC must use
computer models to address the second and third steps - timing and alternative hypotheses.
Here things get sticky. The models cited by the IPCC are still primarily statistical curve -
fitting exercises rather than mathematical reenactments of the effects of the laws of physics
on the interaction of molecules in the hurly-burly of a global system,‖ Rossiter explained.
Rossiter also wrote a 2006 essay titled ―Convenient Fibs about an Underlying Truth: Al
154