|
August 05, 2009
German Scientist Doubt Climate "Consensus"
Sixty German Scientists doubt the current "consensus" that human CO2emissions are driving the climate. More than 60 prominent German scientists have publicly declared their dissent from man-made global warming fears in an Open Letter to German Chancellor Angela Merkel. The more than 60 signers of the letter include several United Nations IPCC scientists.Well well well. It seems the goat herders at the UN's IPCC have failed to get all their goats in line. Well that is just the opening volley from these German scientists. They have some bigger guns. The scientists declared that global warming has become a "pseudo religion" and they noted that rising CO2 has "had no measurable effect" on temperatures. The German scientists, also wrote that the "UN IPCC has lost its scientific credibility."I'm sure that recent books like these: Heaven and Earth: Global Warming, the Missing Science Air Con: The Seriously Inconvenient Truth About Global Warming Red Hot Lies: How Global Warming Alarmists Use Threats, Fraud, and Deception to Keep You Misinformed Green Hell: How Environmentalists Plan to Ruin Your Life and What You Can Do to Stop Them Scam: The Liberal Misinformation Machine And Its War On America haven't helped the "CO2 is an evil gas" cause. So what is the cause of the recent rise in temperatures which seem to be falling currently? Ah. The Germans have an answer. The July 26, 2009 German scientist letter urged Chancellor Merkel to "strongly reconsider" her position on global warming and requested a "convening of an impartial panel" that is "free of ideology" to counter the UN IPCC and review the latest climate science developments.Is that the final word? Of course not. There is no final word in science. New evidence and/or new ideas are always coming along to displace "what we know is true". One need only look at the history of plate tectonics in geology where the consensus was against the idea of plate tectonics for a very long time. And then with some better evidence and some scientist willing to buck the orthodoxy a new consensus was formed. Now why do the Germans think the CO2 orthodoxy is a religion? It has one of the essential features of a religion: new evidence contrary to belief does not change the belief (at least in the minds of the believers). If you are not in the believer camp it may be a good idea to contact your Congress Critters and make sure they kill the Cap and Tax bill. And even if you are a believer you should contact your critters and make them kill the bill. Why? Because even if you believe the current failing consensus, if India and China don't join in taxing CO2 the Bill will just drive American jobs to India and China. And heaven knows that we could stand to keep what jobs we have. And it wouldn't hurt to have a few more. And no "Green Jobs" Malarkey please. If going Green doesn't reduce costs for energy it is a jobs killer. And when Green Energy costs less than current sources it will not need Government Subsidies and unfunded mandates. Cross Posted at Power and Control posted by Simon on 08.05.09 at 02:53 PM
Comments
The question Mark Steyn asked must be getting asked a lot by a lot of scientists. If your model didn't predict the cooling period we're in, why should I trust it? Veeshir · August 5, 2009 06:48 PM This might not be an easy sell to Merkel who came out of the Environment Ministry earlier in her career and was an outspoken supporter of the Kyoto protocol. Fortunately there is an election coming up over there. Not that politics ever sways the scientific "facts". Jobs are front and center with the people over there as they are over here. Let's hope she is as pragmatic as her German heritage would have her be. Penny · August 5, 2009 06:55 PM I highly recommend "Heaven and Earth". kzgoblu · August 6, 2009 10:23 AM Post a comment
You may use basic HTML for formatting.
|
|
August 2009
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
August 2009
July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 AB 1634 MBAPBSAAGOP Skepticism See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
Schwarzenegger for President!
German Scientist Doubt Climate "Consensus" Well, now I Definitely Trust these guys to lower health care costs There oughta be a law against internalized bigotry! As usual, I can't control the climate.... Two Cows Having something to say versus finding something to say Deliberate aquaculture leads to accidental horticulture Feeling The Heat Commercial Real Estate
Links
Site Credits
|
|
It has one of the essential features of a religion: new evidence contrary to belief does not change the belief (at least in the minds of the believers).
Another feature, perhaps a bit more ominous: the proponents of this "religion" consider any contradiction of its tenets heresy. Some of the more radical among them even consider such heresy punishable by death.