They Said It
Nov 06, 2008
The Skeptics Movement Has Lost a Strong Supporter. Author Michael Crichton Dies of Cancer

The family of Michael Crichton, the million-selling author of such historic and prehistoric science fantasies as Jurassic Park,Timeline and The Andromeda Strain, says the author has died in Los Angeles. Crichton died on Tuesday at age 66. He had been privately battling cancer, his family said. “Through his books, Michael Crichton served as an inspiration to students of all ages, challenged scientists in many fields, and illuminated the mysteries of the world in a way we could all understand,” his family said in a statement.

image

BBC could not help add this comment in their story: “Crichton’s 2004 bestseller State of Fear caused controversy when it cast doubt on the dangers of global warming. Environmentalists said his novel was marring efforts to pass legislation to reduce carbon dioxide emissions.”

A tribute compilation by Marc Morano of stories on Michael Chrichton’s efforts on behalf of a less politiczed and more data oriented view on climate change can be found here.  See Crichtons Address “Aliens Cause Gobal Warming” from 2003 reproduced by the Wall Street Journal on November 7, 2008 here.


Nov 02, 2008
“..the greatest mass delusion in the history of the world - that CO2 was considered a deadly poison”

Dr. Richard S. Lindzen, MIT

"What historians will definitely wonder about in future centuries is how deeply flawed logic, obscured by shrewd and unrelenting propaganda, actually enabled a coalition of powerful special interests to convince nearly everyone in the world that CO2 from human industry was a dangerous, planet-destroying toxin. It will be remembered as the greatest mass delusion in the history of the world - that CO2, the life of plants, was considered for a time to be a deadly poison. See more here. From TWTW November 1, 2008 by Dr. Fred Singer available here.


Oct 30, 2008
“The developing world early realized that carbon control was a ploy to constrain their development”

By Dr. Richard S. Lindzen note to Benny Peiser

"The developing world early realized that carbon control was a ploy to constrain their development into meaningful competitors. Now they are matching the cynicism of the developed world.

Rajendra Pachauri simultaneously helped prepare a climate report for the Government of India that argues that climate change will not be a problem for India, while, as head of the IPCC, he preaches that climate change will bring doom and disaster to the rest of the world, and urges the west to become vegetarian. Somehow, the cynicism seems remarkably clear to many - even if the Nobel Peace Prize Committee fails to notice it.”

Richard S. Lindzen
Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Atmospheric Sciences
MIT, Cambridge, MA 02139 USA


Oct 26, 2008
Global Warming: The Naked Truth

The Internet Skeptic

New Video: Global Warming: The Naked Truth

See recent low temperature records courtesy of Ice Age Now here.


Oct 20, 2008
New Al Gore Movie - “Supernova! It’s comin’ y’all!”

Frank Caliendo imitating Al Gore on Climate Change Fraud

Impressionist Frank Caliendo does his best Al Gore basically admitting that, “it’s the sun, stupid” - but Gore goes all alarmist, of course. See youtube video here.


Oct 16, 2008
More Skeptics Speaking Out Almost Daily

Skeptics are speaking out more and more as the earth cools. They are questioning the role of carbon dioxide, pointing out the many failures of the climate models, discussing the underestimated role of the sun and oceans in climate change. 

See a partial list of the new scientists speaking out in just the last month compiled by Marc Morano here. They join the list of well over 500 scientists who have spoken out since 2007 here, the 31,000 scientists (9,000 PhDs) who signed the Petition Project statement and 1,100 who signed the Manhattan Declaration.

There is a growing consensus that climate change is real but natural. 


Oct 14, 2008
“The IPPC AR4 is the consensus of 2500 top scientists?”

By Rupert Wyndham

John McLean is the authority on the IPCC, but I believe the following to be correct. In some ways, the most outrageously mendacious claim of all, and for the following reasons:

There aren’t 2500 climate scientists in the world - truly dedicated specialists about 100, per Prof. Siunichi Akasofu. Many of those named disagree with the Reports themselves but, above all, with the SPMs which flow from them. Since the reports of WGs 2 & 3 necessarily flow from the work of WG1, it is essential that this should be robust. It is anything but, as we have seen.  SPMs, what 99% of people read - if anything at all, are not written by scientists anyway but by civil servants, inter alia, obsessed by political correctness; mustn’t gainsay 3rd world contributions, etc. Scientifically, they frequently clash with underlying WG reports. Protests are simply ignored - well documented, by the way. The UN for the first time in 2007 released to the web the comments of reviewers who assessed the drafts of the WG1 report of AR4, together with IPCC editors’ responses. 308 reviewers commented on WG1, but only 32 commented on more than three chapters. Only five commented on all 11 chapters. Only half commented on more than one chapter.

It gets worse. The critical chapter is No. 9, in which the near certainty of GW increases being due to human activity is asserted. Only 62 reviewers commented. Of these, 55 had self-evident potential vested interests. Thus, precisely seven could reasonably be seen as impartial. Two rejected the findings of the report altogether, four turned out to have less transparent potential conflicts of interest, and the last made only a single comment on the entire report. Thirty four reviewers’ comments/suggestions were rejected with no reason being given. Enough said!


Oct 08, 2008
“Tamino’s holier-than-thou critique is irrelevant to what I have presented”

Dr. Roy Spencer

October 8, 2008 Research Update #1: Our Feedback Diagnosis paper to appear in J. Climate, Nov. 1 issue.

October 8, 2008 Research Update #2: Recent satellite data invalidates IPCC climate models.

October 8, 2008: A Brief Comment on “Spencer’s Folly”
For anyone who has stumbled across a rather condescending critique of our latest research on feedback by someone who calls himself “Tamino”, I can only say that Tamino could have saved himself a lot of trouble if he would have noticed that all of my feedback work addresses TIME-VARYING radiative forcing (as occurs during natural climate variability), not CONSTANT radiative forcing (as is approximately the case with global warming). Tamino’s analytical solution does not exist in the time-varying case, and so his holier-than-thou critique is irrelevant to what I have presented.

See Roy’s Nature’s Thermostat site here.


Page 36 of 45 pages « First  <  34 35 36 37 38 >  Last »