• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Scientists Make Anti-Global Warming Case

    Al Gore is a politician who somehow managed to win a Nobel Peace Prize. Ivar Giaever is a Nobel Laureate in Physics. When it comes to global warming one has said, “If we allow this to happen, it would be deeply and unforgivably immoral. It would condemn coming generations to a catastrophically diminished future.” The other asserted, “I am a skeptic. … Global warming has become a new religion.”

    It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out who said what here, although one of these guys is much closer to being a rocket scientist while the other merely pretends to be one. More importantly, Ivar Giaever is only one of 650 dissenting scientists who are taking their case to the United Nations global warming conference in Poznan, Poland.

    The Senate Minority Report, to be released later today,

    “has added about 250 scientists (and growing) in 2008 to the over 400 scientists who spoke out in 2007. The over 650 dissenting scientists are more than 12 times the number of UN scientists (52) who authored the media hyped IPCC 2007 Summary for Policymakers.”

    The growing skepticism is only one of many reasons why the United States shouldn’t agree to any global carbon reduction treaty. The fact that cutting greenhouse gas emissions would be extremely costly and would insignificantly affect global temperatures are pretty convincing reasons, too. The Congressional Budget Office reports that a mere 15 percent cut in emissions would increase the annual average household’s energy costs by $1,300. And Obama wants to cut emissions by 80 percent? Yikes.

    Also frightening is the stranglehold global warming alarmists and environmental activists have on the political message. George Mason economist Walter Williams says,

    “The average individual American has little or no clout with Congress and can be safely ignored. But it’s a different story with groups such as Environmental Defense Fund, Sierra Club and The Nature Conservancy. When they speak, Congress listens. Unlike the average American, they are well organized, loaded with cash and well positioned to be a disobedient congressman’s worse nightmare. Their political and economic success has been a near disaster for our nation.”

    Some of the quotes released from the skeptic scientists in the Senate Minority Report are very telling. Former NASA official, atmospheric scientist Dr. Joanne Simpson declared,

    “Since I am no longer affiliated with any organization nor receiving any funding, I can speak quite frankly….As a scientist I remain skeptical.”

    Paleontologist Dr. Eduardo Tonni, of the Committee for Scientific Research in Buenos Aires emphasized,

    “The [global warming] scaremongering has its justification in the fact that it is something that generates funds.”

    2008 has turned out to be a year of global cooling and much of the doomsday talk has dissolved. It’s vitally important to understand the science before we embark on a plan that would mean doomsday for our economy. Heritage energy expert Ben Lieberman sums it perfectly,

    “[F]ear is two-edged sword. It can be used to whip up support for action over the near term, but it is hard to sustain for long, especially if it is not well supported by fact. Eventually it could lead to a backlash. Indeed, the global-warming doomsayers may well prove to be their own worst enemy, with their credibility taking a tumble along with the prospects for cap-and-trade legislation.”

    Posted in Energy [slideshow_deploy]

    31 Responses to Scientists Make Anti-Global Warming Case

    1. Mark,Houston says:

      Hey, what I want to know is why no one in the media or the U.N. is looking at how much money(which is ironicaly green) Al Gore is making on this global warming circus . Just how stupid does the U.N.think we are? Al Gore has yet to be correct on ONE global warming prediction . I say this as I'm brushing the SNOW off my car here in the HOUSTON area . GOOD ONE AL !

    2. Spiritof76, New Hamp says:

      Anthropogenic Global warming is not science but a hoax perpetrated by a coalition of anti-capitalists and anti-US crowd here and abroad.

      The model used to predict global warming due to CO2 does not have any account of solar sunspot activities. Further, it does not have proper negative feedback to increased levels of CO2. It is not a valid model at all as it can not predict global cooling that occurred in 1650-1700 due to Maunder Minimum or for that matter any other cooling or warming that had occurred before.

      Those that want to grab power through the hoax may resort to reducing the population of US as our energy consumption per capita exceeds all other nations. Remember, Obama stated, "we are 5% of world population consuming 20% of world's resources". That is where we are headed unless we turn the county around.

    3. Pingback: The scientists you never hear about. « Global Warming Follies

    4. Thomas Gray South Ca says:

      Doc 3 of 5 jobs = pollution,

      Global warming, greenhouse gas emissions.

      Talks, the European Union.

      The discussion to set limits for carbon dioxide emissions, a five-hour "showdown" recalled by a Mr. Trittin in march 2004 with a Mr Wolfgang Clement, then the economy minister, in which he lost a battle to lower the overall limit. It was eventually set at 499 million tons a year, a reduction of 2 million tons.

      In a recent e-mail message, Mr Clement did not challenge the details of his former colleague's account, but he characterized as " just nonsence" Mr Trittin's claims of undue industry influence. He said the greens were unrealistic about what could be achieved,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

      COMMENT, Mr clement has made a profound statement here, the greens were unrealistic about what could be achieved, for starters they are going to replace coal and nuclear powered electricity with wind and solar, I am telling you people it is not going to happen for many years if ever.

      the amounts of electricity produced by wind and solar at this time cannot replace nuclear and coal, last year there were 150 new coal fired power plants that are planed to be built here in the U.S. Wind only works where the wind blows.

      Most of the country cannot use wind and both wind and solar are very expensive compared to coal and nuclear becouse for one thing the power grid must be changed more money and to try and install an intermittent power source to one that demands constant supply is not going to work it defies the law of physics.

    5. Pingback: Scientists Make Anti-Global Warming Case–But they’re usually ignored « Conservative Thoughts and Profundity

    6. Jon, NJ says:

      let's check back in April and see if we really want to believe this bunk. Global warming comes from these pinheads spouting off. Maybe we need a depression so that pseudo intellectuals get busy and work to eat for once.

    7. richard traxler we says:

      Al Gore should be made to prove his "facts".

      We all know he can't, so lets all calm down and

      forget about "global warming" and get out our snow shovels and dig out Dallas and Louisiana…

    8. Wayne Holladay, Rexb says:

      Has anyone in Washington reviewed the last 5 years of the financial statements of the Banks, Wall Street goo-roos and the auto businesses? The're making a profit or not should be the tale that should tell us if they are managing their Businesses right and wether they qualify for or are worthy of a loan (Not a bail out) The American People and their representative's need to know how risky the loan is going to be.

      I know, my Bank wants to know before they give me any loan. And they also want to know how it will be paid back! Why are the big boys any different than us Joe Commons's are?

      As I understand it, the average auto worker makes between $80 to $90 an hour, $3600 a week, $187,000 a year. No wonder they don't want to make concessions and their Union Bosses don't want to either, (they don't want to upset the Apple cart) What do they stand to loose? Millions! Their life styles will have to CHANGE! and who in America wants CHANGE?

      If you're bankrupt and the Union Workers don't want to CHANGE and help their bread keeper then the bread keeper, in trouble and wants to change should just simply go bankrupt, can all the workers and hire the millions of people who would be more than happy to work for $20 to $30 an hour, $800-$1200 a week – $41,600-$62,400 a year. Millions of new jobs would be created and we average Americans could afford to buy and drive these cars.

      Last comment! What are the Japanese Auto makers doing differently? Economic Experts say that "competition is great – It's called "survival of the fittest."" The weak – They just fade away!" UNLESS THEY ARE WILLING TO CHANGE TO MEET WHAT THEIR COMPETITION IS DOING RIGHT THEN JUST WATCH THEM FADE AWAY" UNION WORKERS – Is fading away worth it?

      HAS ANYONE HEARD THE FOLLOWING WORD LATELY? CHANGE!

    9. slanny, alaska says:

      face it u all have no proof that global warming is not true. it is a real deal. we people in alaska are seeing ice melting and animal extinction. someone i kbow lives in new york and they have breathing problems because of the air pollution which results in the greenhouse effect.you all need to learn about global warming to say that u dont believe in it.

    10. Sarah, Brisbane, Aus says:

      Can you please write update on what was outcome of Poznan Conference, as I can't find anything…. This Global Warming Hoax must be stopped.

      I can't understand by big business (who will be effected the most) and small business leaders don't get together to fight the fraud.

      All you need to do is LOOK AT THE SCIENCE. Simple.

    11. Bob R, Tucson, AZ says:

      We scientists, I'm a Geologist, have several strong reasons for doubting CO2 has any perceptable influence on global warming. Graphs of

      the heating curve versus the CO2 curve, where ever applied to past climates, plainly show that CO2 is a follower, not an initiator. In some cases it may take as much as 800 years to catch up. Another strong reason to doubt CO2 role in warming, is the fact that there is no history of uncontrollable warming episodes in studies of ancient climates even where CO2 levels were as much as 13 times todays minescule amount of 390ppms (parts per million) or around .02% or that is 2/100 of 1 percent. During the age of the dinosaurs when as much as 5000 parts per million of CO2 was in our air, life thrived, there were lush forests, certain dinosaurs evolved into birds, and primite mammals evolved. It was even warm enough for dinosaurs above the arctic circle. But no DRASTIC WARMING OCCURRED THEN SO WHY SHOULD IT OCCUR NOW. I and a lot of my peers are convinced that humanity woould survive and probably thrive in a warmer climate. It is a fool's errand to try to control climates. This warming / cooling is cyclic and always has been. Environmentalists do not seem to understand we cannot change natural events but we can use our technology to weather them out as long as its warm or warmer. Another glaciation in the not distant future is a distinct possibility and a really dire situation for our vastly overpopulated world. Now that is a real possibility we should never forget.

    12. Ken , Florida says:

      What animals went extinct?

      2005- 20,000 new species: 2007- 16,000. We are more likely to be devoured by that new Bacteria that eats co2 and environmentalists~ SOYLENT GREEN~ before either pole gets "WARM"!

      Greenhouses and Iceboxes are good but which one would you prefer to live in?

      Shovel more coal in the boiler honey it's gonna be a cold night!

    13. Pingback: Seriously? | The Prairie Penguin

    14. Peter pennsylvania says:

      The public is woefully stupid on global warming largely because they listen to morons like Al Gore to find out what they should believe. The only people anyone should listen to is scientists who know this stuff. And not just scientists who advocate global warming but also those who remain skeptical of man made global warming. There seems to be more consensus among scientists that global warming caused by humans is unresolved. That they remain skeptical. So why aren't you all listening to them? Instead you listen to whatever Al Gore says. He is an idiot. He has no training or expertise in climatology or meteorology. Why would you believe anything he says?

    15. Kathy, Vanuatu says:

      Al Gore is not an idiot; he is a lot smarter than we (skeptics) are as he managed to embed himself into the fabric of the global consciousness. He has the money and the credentials (Nobel Prize, among others)and is on the winning side. Another 250 scientists or another 2,500 or even another 25,000 are not going to make any difference, as long as their camp has the media and all the other "brain-washing" mechanisms on their side and as long as the IPCC is able to spread its lies and many many countries are passing legislation and gearing up for the draconian economic measures that will cost us trillions of dollars. Not to mention that stock markets are already trading in "carbon offsets" (literally hot air) and once the "trading population" gets a taste of it, this is likely to become more destructive than the derivatives and sub-mortgage phenomenon. So, until we don't create a fighting fund that will enable us to bring these leaches into the courts and force them to prove every statement they propagate, we are wasting our time and they will prevale. By the time their hoax becomes obvious, more than a quarter of the globe will be bankrupt.

    16. Kathy, Vanuatu says:

      (Since my comment is still undergoing moderation, could I make a couple of small corrections. Please delete this portion in brackets)

      Al Gore is not an idiot; he is a lot smarter than we (skeptics) are as he managed to embed himself into the fabric of the global consciousness. He has the money and the credentials (Nobel Prize, among others) and is on the winning side. Another 250 scientists or another 2,500 or even another 25,000 are not going to make any difference, as long as their camp has the media and all the other “brain-washing” mechanisms on their side and as long as the IPCC is able to spread its lies, while many many countries are passing legislation and gearing up for the draconian economic measures that will cost us trillions of dollars. Not to mention that stock markets are already trading in “carbon offsets” (literally hot air) and once the “trading population” gets a taste of it, this is likely to become more destructive than the derivatives and sub-mortgage phenomenon. So, unless we create a fighting fund that will enable us to bring these leaches into the courts and force them to prove every statement they propagate, we are wasting our time and they will prevale. By the time their hoax becomes obvious, more than a quarter of the globe will be bankrupt.

    17. Pingback: Scientists Make Anti-Global Warming Case | EVERY THOUGHT CAPTIVE

    18. Mike, California says:

      I was checking out the EPAs web site on global warming and the 2nd sentence of the introductory paragraph says that all the ice on the planet earth has completely melted in the past. Their own words make a complete joke of everything they stand for. If all the ice melted thousands of years ago then why can't it happen again? Well it can and it is. Now I am no genious but I am pretty sure that thousands of years ago there were no cars, factories, power plants burning coal no oil wells and no use of fossil fuels at all. In fact there were no people! Not what we like to call modern people anyway. So if the planet warmed up enough to melt all the ice under those conditions why is it being blamed on humans this time, assuming it is even happening for real. In their own words it happened once, at least, without our help and anyone with 10 brain cells can conclude it can happen again without human help. The EPA destroys their own argument with their own words and doesn't even catch it. That says it all about their mind set. Before they make predictions a century out they should master their predictions a week out which they are not to good at. Darn rain. Oh and southern California has been seeing record cold, so much for warming.

    19. Mike, California says:

      Humans do not own a patent on the extinction of species. It happens without any human input whatsoever. I'm not saying that humans have never been the cause of one species or another to vanish, of course we have. But it is something that took place before human existance and will continue long after we are gone. Some animals are pests, like rats and mice, and eliminating them would be a good thing. But rather Nancy Pelosi spends $50,000,000 studying a marsh mouse, don't study them stomp them! Mankind did not invent extinction and I have proof. The dinosaurs!

    20. jim bezzerides, Spri says:

      Amen!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    21. Ryan says:

      “[F]ear is two-edged sword. It can be used to whip up support for action over the near term, but it is hard to sustain for long, especially if it is not well supported by fact. Eventually it could lead to a backlash."

      Thats exactly what I was saying about Iraq!

      ouch…

    22. Jae, Georgetown says:

      What upsets me the most are the liberal media ad campaigns that spoon-feed Gore's messages to the average citizen with false accusations of guilt. The amount of deficit spending and the ongoing government debauchery is the true threat to future generations, not this false notion of global warming.

    23. Barry, Virginia says:

      There seems to be cooling temps since the 1998 highs. How do the warming theorists square with that one? Oh, there is a difference between climate and weather….well if the weather is cooler then it must be global cooling if it has lasted ten years and counting.

      Check out this website. Call your congressman and senators. If the cap and trade bill is passed we will pay 3X for energy…gas, electric and heating oil. Maybe you can afford it but I’m retired and can’t.

      http://www.isthereglobalcooling.com/

    24. frank tenderson says:

      OK, What everyone on this forum is not realizing is that the nature of the warming climate does not matter. Politics should not even be a part of the conversation.

      Basic idea: Humans vs. Weather

      In the past, humans/animals survived the climate changes by migrating to areas that still had conditions suitable to life.

      Now, In the future, we have technology. I don't know if you realize it or not, but we are getting to a point where we can alter the environmental conditions through eco-engineering. Ex. Creating massive artificial clouds to reflect solar energy, thus reducing our atmospheric temperature.

      So, we must be prepared for a climate change here in Northern America regardless of the nature of that change.

    25. Pingback: Earth Day Hysteria « Speakwire

    26. Pingback: House Dems scale back plans to curb global warming - Debate Politics Forums

    27. Luke, Durban, South says:

      As one of the previous bloggers I am also a geologist, and my feelings are echoed throughout the blog. The Earth has been hotter, the Earth has been colder, (in fact I if I understand correctly we are technically in what is termed an Ice Age, defined by the presence of ice at the poles). The problem is that as a human race we have the ability and the technology to change the environment. The politicians are keen to jump on the bandwagon as this global warming issue is an easy way to gain votes, this is because the ordinary man doesn't realised the cost of the implications of trying to fix something that we may or may not have influenced in the first place! Incidentally as people have mentioned CO2 levels have also been higher, and this is just a few million years before our time!!! They obviously fail to mention this in any pro global warming argument!!! CO2 cycles and global temperature fluctuations do co incide to a point, but no one knows how much the current rise in CO2 levels can be attributed to human influences. Based on this what right do we have to meddle with the current climate? What if we triggered a severe global cooling and the end result was a 'snowball earth' event, with the earth reduced to barren tundra? Wouldn't we be worse off? Passive measures such as reducing CO2 emssions of industry and the human population can only be a good thing, we should all aim to have a minimum impact on the environment, but I feel one needs to be wary of the 'global warming' marketing tool that has and will be implemented increasingly in the future in order to sell 'green products' at an inflated price so we can all feel good about 'saving' the environment from a completely natural process over which we have no control.

    28. Pingback: Methane Increase Caused by Arctic Warming, Tropical Rain | Locavolt

    29. taylor cannistra says:

      this was a really really good article and i am doin a essay on how globall warmin is not real

    30. B.G.Prasad Bangalore says:

      I am an Engineer and have studied causes and effects of global warming and is a lot of crap.

      The recent Himalyan Blunder committed by IPCC is well nailed.

      I would like to contribute and Join such groups.

      Can u help ?

      B.G.Prasad

    31. Pingback: Global Snow Job: Global Warming Losing Steam | RightReborn.com

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.

    ×