Please post all scholarly articles opposed to anthropogenic global warming here

[Old Rocks]

some dissenters

that some includes the 18000 scientists who have signed the Oregon Petition.
Home - Global Warming Petition Project

Global Warming Petition
We urge the United States government to reject the global warming agreement that was written in Kyoto, Japan in December, 1997, and any other similar proposals. The proposed limits on greenhouse gases would harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and damage the health and welfare of mankind.

There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth.

Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine


The Marshall Institute co-sponsored with the OISM a deceptive campaign -- known as the Petition Project -- to undermine and discredit the scientific authority of the IPCC and to oppose the Kyoto Protocol. Early in the spring of 1998, thousands of scientists around the country received a mass mailing urging them to sign a petition calling on the government to reject the Kyoto Protocol. The petition was accompanied by other pieces including an article formatted to mimic the journal of the National Academy of Sciences. Subsequent research revealed that the article had not been peer-reviewed, nor published, nor even accepted for publication in that journal and the Academy released a strong statement disclaiming any connection to this effort and reaffirming the reality of climate change. The Petition resurfaced in 2001.

Spin: There is no scientific basis for claims about global warming. IPCC is a hoax. Kyoto is flawed.

Funding: Petition was funded by private sources.

Affiliated Individuals: Arthur B. Robinson, Sallie L. Baliunas, Frederick Seitz


Global Warming Skeptic Organizations | Union of Concerned Scientists

 

[Old Rocks]

MEA-L is a peer-to-peer listserve for information specifically about multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs). MEA-L also distributes the MEA Bulletin in PDF format. The MEA Bulletin is a publication created by the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD), in cooperation with the United Nations Environment Programme’s Division for Environmental Law and Conventions (UNEP DELC).

 

[Old Rocks]

Latest results from the International Polar Year
December 17, 2008 by eengelh

Arctic warming is intensifying and new methane seeps are forming along the East Siberian Arctic Shelf that could lead to even more rapid warming, scientists warned at a press conference today. Warming is causing accelerating changes in ecosystems, they said, with tundra ecosystems becoming greener and sea ice loss potentially affecting precipitation at lower latitudes.

At the briefing, scientists presented early results from studies conducted during the International Polar Year, an international effort to advance research and focus public attention on Earth’s polar regions. Four scientists—Julienne Stroeve of the University of Colorado Boulder, Donald “Skip” Walker and Igor Semiletov of University of Alaska Fairbanks, and Marco Tedesco of the City College of New York—discussed their work.

“I do believe we’re entering a new state,” Stroeve said. Arctic amplification, in which the Arctic warms more quickly than lower latitudes, is showing the same seasonality and geographic spread that models have projected, she says, “but is happening perhaps sooner than expected.” Thin ice cover in spring 2008 melted quickly and resulted in the second-lowest ice extent in recorded history, after 2007, even though circulation patterns were more favorable to ice in summer 2008. “At this point we are very vulnerable,” Stroeve noted.

Semiletov described observations this past summer of methane release from the carbon pool stored in underwater permafrost beneath the Arctic Ocean. His team discovered “clouds of methane bubbles” above the sediments and chimneys on the shelf. “We have enough data to warn people,” he said, that an abrupt methane release of 1 or 2 percent of the permafrost carbon pool as methane could increase emissions in some areas by as much as 4-fold.

The East Siberian Arctic Shelf is vast—about 2 million square kilometers—and particularly important because methane is able to bubble up through the shallow water column and reach the atmosphere before being oxidized.

The loss of Arctic sea ice can lead to changes on land as well, noted Walker. The loss of sea ice can shut down the regional “air conditioner” and cause warming inland. He examined 28 years of satellite data on an index of greenness called NDVI, or Normalized Difference Vegetation Index, and found increases of up to 24 percent in some tundra areas that had warmed in conjunction with sea ice loss. Some rare ecosystem types could vanish completely if sea ice disappears, he said.
–ERIKA ENGELHAUPT

ES&T at the AGU Fall Meeting

 

[Old Rocks]

The link in the prior post will give brief descriptions of many papers presented at the last AGU meeting.

 

[FactFinder]

some dissenters

that some includes the 18000 scientists who have signed the Oregon Petition.
Home - Global Warming Petition Project

Global Warming Petition
We urge the United States government to reject the global warming agreement that was written in Kyoto, Japan in December, 1997, and any other similar proposals. The proposed limits on greenhouse gases would harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and damage the health and welfare of mankind.

There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth.

Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine


The Marshall Institute co-sponsored with the OISM a deceptive campaign -- known as the Petition Project -- to undermine and discredit the scientific authority of the IPCC and to oppose the Kyoto Protocol. Early in the spring of 1998, thousands of scientists around the country received a mass mailing urging them to sign a petition calling on the government to reject the Kyoto Protocol. The petition was accompanied by other pieces including an article formatted to mimic the journal of the National Academy of Sciences. Subsequent research revealed that the article had not been peer-reviewed, nor published, nor even accepted for publication in that journal and the Academy released a strong statement disclaiming any connection to this effort and reaffirming the reality of climate change. The Petition resurfaced in 2001.

Spin: There is no scientific basis for claims about global warming. IPCC is a hoax. Kyoto is flawed.

Funding: Petition was funded by private sources.

Affiliated Individuals: Arthur B. Robinson, Sallie L. Baliunas, Frederick Seitz


Global Warming Skeptic Organizations | Union of Concerned Scientists

If they received a mass mailing I assume being scientists they objectively and of free will determined that this was important enough to add their signature. I haven't heard of anyone wanting to retract their stance.

Seems some would if they thought they were fleeced and you would have spammed the board repeatedly with it.

 

[FactFinder]

Here's a bit of real science:
1) Solar irradiance tied to the sunspot cycle is the primary determinant of global temperature change; we are heading into a period of decreased activity and solar irradiance that will result in global cooling.

SCIENTISTS PREDICT SOLAR DOWNTURN, GLOBAL COOLING

New Scientist magazine, 16 September 2006
HYPERLINK "http://www.newscientist.com/unpwlogin.ns" \t "linkWin" SCIENTISTS PREDICT SOLAR DOWNTURN, GLOBAL COOLING

It is known as the Little Ice Age. Bitter winters blighted much of the northern hemisphere for decades in the second half of the 17th century. The French army used frozen rivers as thoroughfares to invade the Netherlands. New Yorkers walked from Manhattan to Staten Island across the frozen harbour.
Sea ice surrounded Iceland for miles and the island's population halved. It wasn't the first time temperatures had plunged: a couple of hundred years earlier, between 1420 and 1570, a climatic downturn claimed the Viking colonies on Greenland, turning them from fertile farmlands into arctic wastelands.

Could the sun have been to blame? We now know that, curiously, both these mini ice ages coincided with prolonged lulls in the sun's activity - the sunspots and dramatic flares that are driven by its powerful magnetic field.

Of course any farmer could tell you that a strong sun warms things up.

2) 2008 has recorded a significant drop (app. 0.65 degrees C, or more) in global temperature, in line with a decreasing temperature trend since 2000.

CRU Information Sheet no. 1: Global Temperature Record




3) The greenhouse signature is missing. Weather balloons have scanned the skies for years but can find no sign of the telltale ‘hot-spot’ warming pattern that greenhouse gases would leave. Something else caused the warming.

Are Carbon Emissions the Cause of Global Warming? - David Evans - Mises Institute

Greenhouse Signature Missing — 2007
Second crucial point, August 2007: There are several possible causes of global warming, and they each warm the atmosphere at different latitudes and altitudes — that is, each cause will produce a distinct pattern of hot spots in the atmosphere, or "signature." The greenhouse signature is very distinct from the others: warming due to greenhouse would cause most warming in the tropics at about 10 km up in the atmosphere:


4) The 800 or so year gap between the initiation of global warming and increases in CO2 (from ice cores covering app. the last 600,000 years) indicate that CO2 does not cause warming.

CO2 Science


Ice Core Studies Prove CO2 Is Not the Powerful Climate Driver Climate Alarmists Make It Out to Be
Volume 6, Number 26: 25 June 2003

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



5) The greenhouse effect of adding CO2 to the atmosphere is a function of percentage composition; as the percentage rise, the greenhouse effect diminishes.

Cold Facts on Global Warming
The arithmetic of absorption of infrared radiation also works to decrease the linearity. Absorption of light follows a logarithmic curve (Figure 1) as the amount of absorbing substance increases. It is generally accepted that the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is already high enough to absorb almost all the infrared radiation in the main carbon dioxide absorption bands over a distance of only a few km. Thus, even if the atmosphere were heavily laden with carbon dioxide, it would still only cause an incremental increase in the amount of infrared absorption over current levels. This means that a situation like Venus could not happen here. The atmosphere of Venus is 90 times thicker than Earth's and is 96% carbon dioxide, making the atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration on Venus 300,000 times higher than on Earth. Even so, the high temperatures on Venus are only partially caused by carbon dioxide; a major contributor is the thick bank of clouds containing sulfuric acid [7]. Although these clouds give Venus a high reflectivity in the visible region, the Galileo probe showed that the clouds appear black at infrared wavelengths of 2.3 microns due to strong infrared absorption [8]. Thus, Venus's high temperature might be entirely explainable by direct absorption of incident light, rather than by any greenhouse effect. The infrared absorption lines by carbon dioxide are also broadened by the high pressure on Venus [9], making any comparison with Earth invalid.

Fig.1. Transmitted light is a logarithmic function of concentration. This curve is the familiar Beer's Law.

--------------------------------------------------------------

But getting back to the real science. You have not addressed one of these points. These were all crucial fundamentals for IPCC. All exposed as frauds.

 

[FactFinder]

Here's another peer reviewed paper for you. From that same Oregon Petition that you choose to demonize rather than debate the facts behind the GW drama.

http://www.oism.org/pproject/s33p36.htm
Environmental Effects of Increased Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide

 

[Old Rocks]

you are one stupid ass if you thing that that peice of garbage was a peer reviewed article. It was not peer reviewed, nor published in a scientific journal. And OISM is a group of kooks on a farm near the small town of Cave Junction in Oregon.

The Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine (OISM) describes itself as "a small research institute" that studies "biochemistry, diagnostic medicine, nutrition, preventive medicine and the molecular biology of aging." It is headed by Arthur B. Robinson, an eccentric scientist who has a long history of controversial entanglements with figures on the fringe of accepted research. OISM also markets a home-schooling kit for "parents concerned about socialism in the public schools" and publishes books on how to survive nuclear war.

The OISM is located on a farm about 7 miles from the town of Cave Junction, Oregon (population 1,126). Located slightly east of Siskiyou National Forest, Cave Junction is one of several small towns nestled in the Illinois Valley, whose total population is 15,000. Best known as a gateway to the Oregon Caves National Monument, it is described by its chamber of commerce as "the commercial, service, and cultural center for a rural community of small farms, woodlots, crafts people, and families just living apart from the crowds. ... It's a place where going into the market can take time because people talk in the aisles and at the checkstands. Life is slower, so you have to be patient. You'll be part of that slowness because it is enjoyable to be neighborly." The main visitors are tourists who come to hike, backpack and fish in the area's many rivers and streams. Cave Junction is the sort of out-of-the-way location you might seek out if you were hoping to survive a nuclear war, but it is not known as a center for scientific and medical research. The OISM would be equally obscure itself, except for the role it played in 1998 in circulating a deceptive "scientists' petition" on global warming in collaboration with Frederick Seitz, a retired former president of the National Academy of Sciences.

Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine - SourceWatch

 

[Old Rocks]

The Oregon Petition, sponsored by the OISM, was circulated in April 1998 in a bulk mailing to tens of thousands of U.S. scientists. In addition to the petition, the mailing included what appeared to be a reprint of a scientific paper. Authored by OISM's Arthur B. Robinson, Sallie L. Baliunas, Willie Soon, and Zachary W. Robinson, the paper was titled "Environmental Effects of Increased Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide" and was printed in the same typeface and format as the official Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Also included was a reprint of a December 1997, Wall Street Journal editorial, "Science Has Spoken: Global Warming Is a Myth, by Arthur and Zachary Robinson. A cover note signed "Frederick Seitz/Past President, National Academy of Sciences, U.S.A./President Emeritus, Rockefeller University", may have given some persons the impression that Robinson's paper was an official publication of the academy's peer-reviewed journal. The blatant editorializing in the pseudopaper, however, was uncharacteristic of scientific papers.

Robinson's paper claimed to show that pumping carbon dioxide into the atmosphere is actually a good thing. "As atmospheric CO2 increases," it stated, "plant growth rates increase. Also, leaves lose less water as CO2 increases, so that plants are able to grow under drier conditions. Animal life, which depends upon plant life for food, increases proportionally." As a result, Robinson concluded, industrial activities can be counted on to encourage greater species biodiversity and a greener planet:

As coal, oil, and natural gas are used to feed and lift from poverty vast numbers of people across the globe, more CO2 will be released into the atmosphere. This will help to maintain and improve the health, longevity, prosperity, and productivity of all people.
Human activities are believed to be responsible for the rise in CO2 level of the atmosphere. Mankind is moving the carbon in coal, oil, and natural gas from below ground to the atmosphere and surface, where it is available for conversion into living things. We are living in an increasingly lush environment of plants and animals as a result of the CO2 increase. Our children will enjoy an Earth with far more plant and animal life as [sic] that with which we now are blessed. This is a wonderful and unexpected gift from the Industrial Revolution.
In reality, neither Robinson's paper nor OISM's petition drive had anything to do with the National Academy of Sciences, which first heard about the petition when its members began calling to ask if the NAS had taken a stand against the Kyoto treaty. Robinson was not even a climate scientist. He was a biochemist with no published research in the field of climatology, and his paper had never been subjected to peer review by anyone with training in the field. In fact, the paper had never been accepted for publication anywhere, let alone in the NAS Proceedings. It was self-published by Robinson, who did the typesetting himself on his own computer. (It was subsequently published as a "review" in Climate Research, which contributed to an editorial scandal at that publication.) Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine - SourceWatch

 

[FactFinder]

Still trying to demonize OISM, heh? Is that a diversionary tactic to escape answering the flawed constructs of the IPCC?

Hey and what is wrong with advice for home schoolers and self defense in a nuclear attack? Assuming they do that. I haven't seen any "peer reviewed" proof.

 

[Chris]

Still trying to demonize OISM, heh? Is that a diversionary tactic to escape answering the flawed constructs of the IPCC?

Hey and what is wrong with advice for home schoolers and self defense in a nuclear attack? Assuming they do that. I haven't seen any "peer reviewed" proof.

Why are the glaciers melting?

 

[FactFinder]

Still trying to demonize OISM, heh? Is that a diversionary tactic to escape answering the flawed constructs of the IPCC?

Hey and what is wrong with advice for home schoolers and self defense in a nuclear attack? Assuming they do that. I haven't seen any "peer reviewed" proof.

Why are the glaciers melting?

Some say it because of soot. That would explain China. You don't burn dirty coal do ya?
Why are other glaciers expanding? That seems to fly against AGW being the cause, heh?

 

[Chris]

Still trying to demonize OISM, heh? Is that a diversionary tactic to escape answering the flawed constructs of the IPCC?

Hey and what is wrong with advice for home schoolers and self defense in a nuclear attack? Assuming they do that. I haven't seen any "peer reviewed" proof.

Why are the glaciers melting?

Some say it because of soot. That would explain China. You don't burn dirty coal do ya?
Why are other glaciers expanding? That seems to fly against AGW being the cause, heh?

Nice try, but all the glaciers are melting except for a few in Norway.

Why is Venus hotter than Mercury?

 

[AllieBaba]

Troll.

 

[del]

Why are the glaciers melting?

Some say it because of soot. That would explain China. You don't burn dirty coal do ya?
Why are other glaciers expanding? That seems to fly against AGW being the cause, heh?

Nice try, but all the glaciers are melting except for a few in Norway.

Why is Venus hotter than Mercury?

mercury has no atmosphere.

are you auditioning for "are you smarter than a 5th grader"?

good luck.

 

[FactFinder]

Why are the glaciers melting?

Some say it because of soot. That would explain China. You don't burn dirty coal do ya?
Why are other glaciers expanding? That seems to fly against AGW being the cause, heh?

Nice try, but all the glaciers are melting except for a few in Norway.

Why is Venus hotter than Mercury?

Ok, at least got you to admit on Norway. I guess this has to be taken verrrryyyy sloooowwww. How about Mt. St. Helens? We even have a poster in here who lives near there witnessing the expanison. At least we know that Norway has received a permit to ignore AGW.

 

[Old Rocks]

Geneva, 25Feb09

(AP) Glaciers in Antarctica are melting faster and across a much wider area than previously thought, a development that threatens to raise sea levels worldwide and force millions of people to flee low-lying areas, scientists said Wednesday.

Researchers once believed that the melting was limited to the Antarctic Peninsula, a narrow tongue of land pointing toward South America. But satellite data and automated weather stations now indicate it is more widespread.

The melting “also extends all the way down to what is called west Antarctica,” said Colin Summerhayes, executive director of the Britain-based Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research.

“That's unusual and unexpected,” he told The Associated Press in an interview.

By the end of the century, the accelerated melting could cause sea levels to climb by 3 to 5 feet - levels substantially higher than predicted by a major scientific group just two years ago.

Making matters worse, scientists said, the ice shelves that hold the glaciers back from the sea are also weakening.

The report Wednesday from Geneva was a broad summary of two years of research by scientists from 60 countries. Some of the findings were released in earlier reports.
Glaciers Melting Faster Than First Thought - CBS News

 

[FactFinder]

Geneva, 25Feb09

(AP) Glaciers in Antarctica are melting faster and across a much wider area than previously thought, a development that threatens to raise sea levels worldwide and force millions of people to flee low-lying areas, scientists said Wednesday.

Researchers once believed that the melting was limited to the Antarctic Peninsula, a narrow tongue of land pointing toward South America. But satellite data and automated weather stations now indicate it is more widespread.

The melting “also extends all the way down to what is called west Antarctica,” said Colin Summerhayes, executive director of the Britain-based Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research.

“That's unusual and unexpected,” he told The Associated Press in an interview.

By the end of the century, the accelerated melting could cause sea levels to climb by 3 to 5 feet - levels substantially higher than predicted by a major scientific group just two years ago.

Making matters worse, scientists said, the ice shelves that hold the glaciers back from the sea are also weakening.

The report Wednesday from Geneva was a broad summary of two years of research by scientists from 60 countries. Some of the findings were released in earlier reports.
Glaciers Melting Faster Than First Thought - CBS News

Is that peer reviewed

 

[FactFinder]

Glaciers in western Himalayas thickening
and expanding
Arctic ice cover above it’s 30-year average
By Christopher Booker

Glaciers in western Himalayas thickening and expanding

 

[Old Rocks]

World’s Glaciers Shrink for 18th Year in Alps, Andes (Update2)
Email | Print | A A A

By Jeremy van Loon

Jan. 29 (Bloomberg) -- Glaciers from the Andes to Alaska and across the Alps shrank as much as 3 meters (10 feet), the 18th year of retreat and twice as fast as a decade ago, as global warming threatens an important supply of the world’s water.

Alpine glaciers lost on average 0.7 meters of thickness in 2007, the most recent figures available, data published today by the University of Zurich’s World Glacier Monitoring Service showed. The melting extends an 11-meter retreat since 1980.

“One year doesn’t tell us much, it’s really these long-term trends that help us to understand what’s going on,” Michael Zemp, a researcher at the University of Zurich’s Department of Geography, said in an interview. “The main thing that we can do to stop this is reduce greenhouse gases” that are blamed for global warming.

The Alps have suffered more than other regions with half of the region’s glacier terrain having disappeared since the 1850s, Zemp said. Almost 90 percent of the glaciers in the Alps are smaller than 1 square kilometer (0.4 square mile) and some are as thin as 30 meters, he said.

Some maritime glaciers, or those that terminate in the sea, have grown in recent years, including 2007, Zemp said. They include glaciers at Nigardsbreen, Norway, and Alaska that were helped by temperatures that remain below freezing and ample snow.

Glaciers further inland in Alaska in such sites as the Kenai mountains and Scandinavia matched the overall declining trend seen in Chile, Colombia and throughout the Alps.

Ice Loss

The World Glacier Monitoring Program has measured 30 glaciers, of an estimated 150,000 to 200,000 worldwide, in nine mountain ranges since 1980. More ice has been lost than gained on average in 25 of the past 28 years with the last year of growth reported in 1989, when the Berlin Wall was dismantled and Communist regimes fell across eastern Europe.
Bloomberg.com: Science