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 ...
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Physics professor Kjell Aleklett of the Department of Radiation Sciences and the<br />
Uppsala Hydrocarbon Depletion Study Group at Uppsala University in Sweden<br />
asserts that severe climate change is unlikely before the Earth runs out of fossil fuels.<br />
Writing in a June 5, 2007 post at Australia's Online Opinion, Aleklett suggests that "the<br />
combined volumes of these fuels are insufficient to cause the changes in climate." Aleklett<br />
believes that "compared with what has been previously asserted, we are going to be much<br />
better off in terms of carbon dioxide emissions" because the Earth is nearing "the<br />
maximum production rate for oil, or ‗Peak Oil.'" He concludes by noting "we must discuss<br />
and dispute the temperature increases that the IPCC-families indicate and the fossil fuel<br />
resources that the IPCC uses in its prognoses. We need new estimates of future temperature<br />
increases based on realistic expectations of oil, natural gas and coal use. Only then can we<br />
make sensible decisions for our future. The world's greatest future problem is that too many<br />
people must share too little energy." (LINK)<br />
Anthony Watts, former meteorologist for KHSL-TV, a CBS-TV affiliate in Redding,<br />
California, has examined 460 of the 1221 official climatic weather stations in the 48<br />
lower states, and discovered multiple irregularities that are causing temperature data<br />
to skew higher than it should. Watts, who publishes a website devoted to investigating<br />
surface stations, (LINK) believes his research casts doubt on NOAA's current and historical<br />
temperature data reports. "I believe we will be able to demonstrate that some of the global<br />
warming increase is not from CO2 but from localized changes in the temperaturemeasurement<br />
environment," Watts told the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review on June 17, 2007.<br />
Watts examined temperature stations that the National Oceanic & Atmospheric<br />
Administration's (NOAA) uses as part of its National Climatic Data Center. The NCDC<br />
has about 1,221 mostly rural weather observation stations around the country. Watts, who<br />
founded the web site surfacestations.org, has made it his mission to quality check weather<br />
stations to see if the data is being accurately captured. (LINK) Watts noted one such<br />
weather station in California was "surrounded by asphalt and concrete, its also within 10<br />
feet of buildings, and within 8 feet of a large metal cell tower that could be felt reflecting<br />
sunlight/heat. And worst of all, air conditioning units on the cell tower electronics buildings<br />
vent warm air within 10 feet of the sensor." Watts concluded, "I can tell you with certainty,<br />
the temperature data from this station is useless." Watt's extensive data research was noted<br />
by Meteorologist Joseph Conklin on August 10, 2007: (LINK) "The (U.S.) National<br />
Climate Data Center (NCDC) is in the middle of a scandal. Their global observing<br />
network, the heart and soul of surface weather measurement, is a disaster. Urbanization<br />
has placed many sites in unsuitable locations - on hot black asphalt, next to trash burn<br />
barrels, beside heat exhaust vents, even attached to hot chimneys and above outdoor grills!<br />
The data and approach taken by many global warming alarmists is seriously flawed. If the<br />
global data were properly adjusted for urbanization and station siting, and land use change<br />
issues were addressed, what would emerge is a cyclical pattern of rises and falls with much<br />
less of any background trend." (LINK)<br />
Dr. Wilson Flood, of the Royal Society of Chemistry and a chemistry education<br />
consultant, wrote that it is an "unproven hypothesis that rising greenhouse gas levels are<br />
largely responsible for climate change" in a June 27, 2007 letter to the Scotsman<br />
newspaper. "Further Met Office data also shows that global temperatures have actually<br />
fallen slightly in the last decade and have shown no statistically significant rise since 1990.<br />
Just to cap it all, NASA studies show that atmospheric levels of the greenhouse gas<br />
240