05.11.2014 Views

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

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

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

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

themselves behind more and more pseudo explanations, which are not part of the academic<br />

education or even of the physics training." (LINK) & (LINK)<br />

Geologist/Geochemist Dr. Tom V. Segalstad, a professor and head of the Geological<br />

Museum at the University of Oslo and formerly an expert reviewer with the UN<br />

IPCC, expressed skepticism of climate fears in 2007. A July 7, 2007 article in Canada's<br />

Financial Post read, "In the real world, as measurable by science, CO2 in the atmosphere<br />

and in the ocean reach a stable balance when the oceans contain 50 times as much CO2 as<br />

the atmosphere. ‗The IPCC postulates an atmospheric doubling of CO2, meaning that the<br />

oceans would need to receive 50 times more CO2 to obtain chemical equilibrium,' explains<br />

Prof. Segalstad. ‗This total of 51 times the present amount of carbon in atmospheric CO2<br />

exceeds the known reserves of fossil carbon-- it represents more carbon than exists in all<br />

the coal, gas, and oil that we can exploit anywhere in the world.'" The article continued,<br />

"Also in the real world, Prof. Segalstad's isotope mass balance calculations -- a standard<br />

technique in science -- show that if CO2 in the atmosphere had a lifetime of 50 to 200<br />

years, as claimed by IPCC scientists, the atmosphere would necessarily have half of its<br />

current CO2 mass. Because this is a nonsensical outcome, the IPCC model postulates that<br />

half of the CO2 must be hiding somewhere, in ‗a missing sink.' <strong>Man</strong>y studies have sought<br />

this missing sink -- a Holy Grail of climate science research-- without success. ‗It is a<br />

search for a mythical CO2 sink to explain an immeasurable CO2 lifetime to fit a<br />

hypothetical CO2 computer model that purports to show that an impossible amount of<br />

fossil fuel burning is heating the atmosphere,' Prof. Segalstad concludes. ‗It is all a<br />

fiction.'" (LINK)<br />

Geologist Dr. David Kear, the former director of geological survey at the Department<br />

of Science and Industrial Research in New Zealand, called predictions of rising sea level<br />

as a result of man-made global warming "science fiction," and said the basic rules of<br />

science are being ignored. "When youngsters are encouraged to take part in a school<br />

science fair the first thing they are told to do is check the results, then re-check them,<br />

something NIWA [National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research] appear to have<br />

forgotten to do," Kear said in a April 13, 2007 article. "In looking at the next 50 years, why<br />

have they not studied the past 50 years and applied their findings to the predictions? One<br />

would think this was a must," Kear explained. The article continued, "First global warming<br />

predictions made in 1987 estimated an annual rise in sea levels of 35mm. That scared the<br />

world but since then, the figure has continued to be reduced by ‗experts.'" Kear concluded,<br />

"Personal beliefs on climate change and rising sea levels should be delayed until just one of<br />

the many predictions made since 1985 on the basis of carbon additions to the atmosphere<br />

comes true." (LINK)<br />

Solar Physicist and Climatologist Douglas V. Hoyt, who coauthored the book The Role<br />

of the Sun in Climate Change and has worked at both the National Oceanic and<br />

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the National Center for Atmospheric<br />

Research (NCAR), has developed a scorecard to evaluate how accurate climate models<br />

have been. Hoyt wrote, "Starting in 1997, we created a scorecard to see how climate model<br />

predictions were matching observations. The picture is not pretty with most of the<br />

predictions being wrong in magnitude and often in sign." (LINK) A March 1, 2007 blog<br />

post in the National Review explained how the scoring system works. "[Hoyt] gives each<br />

prediction a ‗yes-no-undetermined score.' So if the major models' prediction is confirmed,<br />

179

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!