Critical Thinking

About 250 of the scientists quoted in the report have joined the dissenting scientists in the last year alone.

In fact, the total number of scientists represented in the report is 12 times the number of U.N. scientists who authored the official IPCC 2007 report.

(Story continues below)


Here are some choice excerpts from the report:

"I am a skeptic ... . Global warming has become a new religion." -- Nobel Prize Winner for Physics, Ivar Giaever.
"Since I am no longer affiliated with any organization nor receiving any funding, I can speak quite frankly ... . As a scientist I remain skeptical." -- Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Joanne Simpson, the first woman in the world to receive a Ph.D. in meteorology and formerly of NASA who has authored more than 190 studies and has been called "among the most pre-eminent scientists of the last 100 years."
Warming fears are the "worst scientific scandal in the history ... . When people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists." -- U.N. IPCC Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning Ph.D. environmental physical chemist.
"The IPCC has actually become a closed circuit; it doesn't listen to others. It doesn't have open minds ... . I am really amazed that the Nobel Peace Prize has been given on scientifically incorrect conclusions by people who are not geologists." -- Indian geologist Dr. Arun D. Ahluwalia at Punjab University and a board member of the U.N.-supported International Year of the Planet.
"The models and forecasts of the U.N. IPCC "are incorrect because they only are based on mathematical models and presented results at scenarios that do not include, for example, solar activity." -- Victor Manuel Velasco Herrera, a researcher at the Institute of Geophysics of the National Autonomous University of Mexico.
"It is a blatant lie put forth in the media that makes it seem there is only a fringe of scientists who don't buy into anthropogenic global warming." -- U.S. Government Atmospheric Scientist Stanley B. Goldenberg of the Hurricane Research Division of NOAA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
"Even doubling or tripling the amount of carbon dioxide will virtually have little impact, as water vapor and water condensed on particles as clouds dominate the worldwide scene and always will." -- Geoffrey G. Duffy, a professor in the Department of Chemical and Materials Engineering of the University of Auckland, New Zealand.
"After reading [U.N. IPCC chairman] Pachauri's asinine comment [comparing skeptics to] Flat Earthers, it's hard to remain quiet." -- Climate statistician Dr. William M. Briggs, who specializes in the statistics of forecast evaluation, serves on the American Meteorological Society's Probability and Statistics Committee and is an associate editor of Monthly Weather Review.
"For how many years must the planet cool before we begin to understand that the planet is not warming? For how many years must cooling go on?" -- Geologist Dr. David Gee, the chairman of the science committee of the 2008 International Geological Congress who has authored 130 plus peer-reviewed papers, and is currently at Uppsala University in Sweden.
"Gore prompted me to start delving into the science again and I quickly found myself solidly in the skeptic camp ... . Climate models can at best be useful for explaining climate changes after the fact." -- Meteorologist Hajo Smit of Holland, who reversed his belief in man-made warming to become a skeptic, is a former member of the Dutch U.N. IPCC committee.
"Many [scientists] are now searching for a way to back out quietly (from promoting warming fears), without having their professional careers ruined." -- Atmospheric physicist James A. Peden, formerly of the Space Research and Coordination Center in Pittsburgh, Pa.
"Creating an ideology pegged to carbon dioxide is a dangerous nonsense ... . The present alarm on climate change is an instrument of social control, a pretext for major businesses and political battle. It became an ideology, which is concerning." -- Environmental Scientist Professor Delgado Domingos of Portugal, the founder of the Numerical Weather Forecast group, has more than 150 published articles.
"CO2 emissions make absolutely no difference one way or another ... . Every scientist knows this, but it doesn't pay to say so ... . Global warming, as a political vehicle, keeps Europeans in the driver's seat and developing nations walking barefoot." -- Dr. Takeda Kunihiko, vice-chancellor of the Institute of Science and Technology Research at Chubu University in Japan.
"The [global warming] scaremongering has its justification in the fact that it is something that generates funds." -- Award-winning Paleontologist Dr. Eduardo Tonni, of the Committee for Scientific Research in Buenos Aires and head of the Paleontology Department at the University of La Plata.

Lord Monkton based his opinion on facts that didn't add up, as such, since that time we have found the head of the IPCC, Mr Raj Pachauri, an engineer by trade, submitted a plagerized paper on glacial reduction that was based on absolutely no provable science at all, written by a masters student. The panel That was the same paper than earned him the seat and a Nobel Prize. These inconsistancies in the IPCC, EAU, and Penn State are blaring at all of us as each and everyone is proven completely off of scientific method, meaning the results are tainted for a purpose of gaining a lopesided result. As for Monkton, he tried to debate any of the so called experts on the IPCC's panel or Al Gore and to everyone's suprise (not really) they ran for cover. When the IPCC and EAU release all the FOI request and start letting people, in some cases not even scienetist in climate, sign off on this so called science academy.
As for your bashing of Lord Monkton's dealing with Private Inerprise. I'd say that a small task considering the head of this global climate movement would be Maurice Strong (a criminal from the oil for food scam) and king-pin George Soros who is a convicted felon for insider trading and has been overthrowing governments with the IMF and World Bank two of the most nortorious operations on the planet earth today.
If you like, the lay people of this nation and many others can see right throw trash science that excludes geo-thermal activety and solar events that are every changing. The sun does run throw heating and colling cycles as does the erath gepthermal activety. Once I found out how much C02 was made by the natural earths activeties as the actual human toll is less than 4% of the gross and only 1/2 of that is new CO2 from fossil fuels brought up from the earth's lithosphere.

By that, I'd love to here how you can stand there and state that any of this treaty or cap and trade will actually serve the earth when we all know its the largest scam of anything this type. Why, what does the IMF have any reason in being the executor after they have toppled god knows how many governments and caused how many human rights violations since the 1960 when governments found a purpose for these pirate institutions. Just check what the IMF has done in South America under the cloak of "western economic expansion".
Here is the fact of the matter, I don't disagree that we need to be looking at saving our planet, but when a plan like this is being railroaded by people who have been obviously railroaded by big banks and upper elites for the largest taxing scam ever. I would venture to say that if this were to happen, where would the money come from to really save this panet? Funny how the verything that we can't see and no one can actually tell the trith about is the verything that is certian to kill us all. My guess is we're in far more danger from the over use of anti-biotics and biological warfare than the threat of a warm winter.
And by the way, yes, the climate does change it's called seasons created by a wobble in the axis. So your 73.5 degree constant isn't and will never be.

From the very beginning Lord Monckton brings up the very issue that could likewise be brought against himself. The people in the survey were unqualified to be a voice for scientists because they either were not involved in any aspect of global climate science and that, even some who were had not written a paper on it before. While this is all well and good, Lord Monckton himself is not qualified to be involved in ‘any aspect of global climate science’ and though he has written papers on such a thing and is involved in the community, everything he says should be taken with a grain of salt and it should be noted that his degree’s listed in the interview are mysteriously unidentified. On further research, that degree is from University College and is in Journalism. So while he writes a mean critical analysis any opinion of his own that is inserted in there does not have the credentials that one would expect someone making such claims to have. He is quoted as saying that it does not matter what it is that he believes but rather that which is true. If this were the case he would have the interviewer speak with a scientist rather than himself as that would, necessarily, be the quickest way to the truth. However, just because he is a journalist first and foremost does not mean that his argument cannot be true. That would be a genetic fallacy. The claim is not false solely because of his origin. So long as his information is correct, then all is well though I’m unqualified and do not understand what it is he’s saying when we get into his reasons for being against the idea of human instigated global warming.

Lord Christopher Walter Monckton has something very similar to fox news, a biased opinion. He uses this to corrupt the minds of the uneducated public masses. Viscount Monckton of Brenchley has a degree in journalism, but has become a self-proclaimed expert on climate affairs. Whom would you trust a thousand scientists, each with degrees in their areas of expertise or a single man whom is listed as a “Global Warming” expert, for the Heartland Institute? A Institute that has received over $791,000 from the oil-giant Exxon Mobil since 1998 and at least $190,000 from the tobacco industry.
Monckton first stepped into the public eye with a long public letter published in the Sunday Telegraph, in which he accused the UN of scientific fraud. His paper was filled with several equations and scientific calculations that were quickly dismissed after being examined by real scientists. Among his other hobbies is threatening those who challenge him with liable suits that have yet to materialize. He even wrote two threatening letters addressed to US senators claiming he was a member of the Upper House of the United Kingdom legislature. When asked about Christopher the House of Lords replied, “Christopher Monckton is not and has never been a Member of the House of Lords. There is no such thing as a 'non-voting' or 'honorary' member” . Among his other fallacious claims he was responsible for winning the Falklands war, which was fought in 1982 between the UK and Argentina.
How fortunate for the media that most people do not think! Seems to be the message here. Ultimately Christopher should stick to his toys like the Eternity puzzle. Which he created in June of 1999 by Ertl Toys, which was solved by two scientists, Alex Selby and Oliver Riordan who solved it in 16 months. After this Lord Monckton claimed to have to sell his 67-room house to pay the prize money.