Why Did 32,000 Scientists Sign a Petition Dissenting From Global-Warming Consensus?

re: Why Did 32,000 Scientists Sign a Petition Dissenting From Global-Warming Consensus?

cleanwater — Wed, 06 May 2009 16:37:16 GMT

man-made global warming is a hoax- the greenhouse gas effect was disproved in 1909 by R.W. Wood . The next horror story is that CO2 and other factisous effect may be dangerous to our health- See Federal EPA lies. The Real answer to Man-made global Warming

Teach people that the greenhouse gas effect was disproven in 1909 by R.W. Wood the inventor of IR photograph.( look up the experiment and you can duplicate his results)

The greenhouse gas effect violates the Second Law of Thermodynamics.

Carbon dioxide and methane do not cause global warming only Solar energy causes global warning.

NASA space data shows that there is more ice in the Arctic than there has been in about 10 years.

NASA space temperature data shows that there has not been a temperature increase in the last 7 years,

Al Gore’s book has been proven in UK courts to be 90% lies and there are 35 technical errors that’s proves that the book is a work of fantasy and fiction. The book can not be used in UK science classes because it is not science.

The following references are available on the internet that shows that the greenhouse gas effect is a hoax.

"Falsification of the Atmospheric CO2 greenhouse effects within the Frame of Physics." by Gerlich and Tscheuschner And "Greenhouse Gas Hypothesis Violates Fundamentals of Physics. by Heinz Thieme. A web site by a 16year old young lady "Pounder the Maunder" shows a better understanding of why the greenhouse gas effect is a hoax and that Man made global warming does not happen.(90% of the Congress and the President pretender do not understand that they are being lied to by Al Gore and certain members of NASA). NASA has data that shows that the 95% CO2 atmosphere of Venus does not affect the heat loss from Venus (no greenhouse gas effect)

Other important web site is www.strata-sphere.com ; “icecap.us”;sppi

re: Why Did 32,000 Scientists Sign a Petition Dissenting From Global-Warming Consensus?

donzer1 — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 00:29:41 GMT

I think in time, the idea of the big oil companies and governments in league with each other to impose high taxes and prices on oil will become known as one of the great deceptions of our time. We are being duped and taken however the silver lining hopefully will be the change over from the oil based economy to a hydrogen economy. The high prices spiralling out of control at present as a direct result of higher oil costs will hopefully turn us to a more locally based economy and these trends will continue until the economy as we know it implodes as it creates a total lack of consumer base! Wonder what will happen when these big corporates and governments see that as the middle class falls, so do they!

re: Why Did 32,000 Scientists Sign a Petition Dissenting From Global-Warming Consensus?

John Kurmann — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 18:16:03 GMT

I didn't have room for this in my previous post, but I want to draw attention to the following public statements:

* Last year, the Board of the American Association for the Advancement of Science released <a href="www.aaas.org/.../aaas_climate_statement.pdf">a very strongly-worded statement</a> that concluded the following: "The scientific evidence is clear: global climate change caused by human activities is occurring now, and it is a growing threat to society…The time to control greenhouse gas emissions is now."

* Within the last few years, a coalition of national scientific academies, including those of the U.K., Japan, Russia, France, Germany, China, India, and the U.S. National Academy of Sciences have released 3 joint statements supporting this view and calling for action: the "<a href="www.nationalacademies.org/.../06072005.pdf">Joint science academies' statement: Global response to climate change</a>" (2005), the "<a href="www.nationalacademies.org/.../G8Statement_Energy_07_May.pdf">Joint science academies' statement on growth and responsibility: sustainability, energy efficiency and climate protection</a>" (2007), and the "<a href="www.nationalacademies.org/.../climatechangestatement.pdf">Joint Science Academies' Statement: Climate Change Adaptation and the Transition to a Low Carbon Society</a>" (2008).

re: Why Did 32,000 Scientists Sign a Petition Dissenting From Global-Warming Consensus?

John Kurmann — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 18:03:00 GMT

I'm really disappointed to see Dr. Mercola perpetuating disinformation on this issue. To begin with, the "Petition Project" he used as an intro is bogus. As <a href="www.sourcewatch.org/index.php entry from SourceWatch</a> explains, the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine distributed the petition in a tremendously deceptive way, pretty much anyone was able to sign it--not just qualified scientists, or even actual scientists, period--and few of the signers have the relevant expertise to evaluate the results of climate research.

Most importantly, there is broad and deep scientific agreement on these 3 points regarding global warming and climate disruption:

1. They are happening.

2. Human activities are the primary cause, though we cannot say they are the sole cause.

3. The risks of continuing on the current path of increasing greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere are so great as to justify taking action to dramatically reduce greenhouse gas emissions now as well as to begin adapting.

How can I say this with confidence? Because the preeminent scientific organizations in the world have issued public statements to that effect, as <a href="en.wikipedia.org/.../Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change">this Wikipedia entry</a> on "Scientific opinion on global warming" demonstrates.

His analogy to the tobacco industry is ass-backwards, as well. It hasn't been "global warming advocates" but the fossil fuel industries that have manipulated science to keep society from taking action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. And he is also mistaken when he implies that sunspot cycles are the probable primary cause of the current warming. <a href="www.skepticalscience.com/solar-cycle-length.htm">This entry</a> on the Skeptical Science website explains why.

re: Why Did 32,000 Scientists Sign a Petition Dissenting From Global-Warming Consensus?

Riisen — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 18:05:30 GMT

Wow Greenman, those are amazing reference links that show that these major respected, scientific bodies generally agree with the UN's IPCC's conclusion that man is a major cause of climate change.

Every one please kep in mind that these scientific bodies are our best source of credible, unbiased information in this complex world in which we live.

re: Why Did 32,000 Scientists Sign a Petition Dissenting From Global-Warming Consensus?

Riisen — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 18:03:03 GMT

Wow Greenman, those are amazing reference links that show that all major respected, scientific bodies generally agree with the UN's IPCC's conclusion that man is a major cause of climate change.

Every one please kep in mind that these scientific bodies are our best source of credible, unbiased information.

re: Why Did 32,000 Scientists Sign a Petition Dissenting From Global-Warming Consensus?

Unfairadvantage — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 20:13:09 GMT

Dr. Mercola has his facts straight:

1. The very large number of petition signers demonstrates incontrovertibly that the debate is far from over.

2. The energy and attention being spent on the carbon debate would be much better spent on matters of imminently more dire consequence.

With regard to fact #1: Atmospheric physicist Dr. Richard Lindzen of MIT is among the signatores of the petition, look him up on wikipedia for his credentials. In his words: "There is no consensus, unanimous or otherwise, about long-term climate trends and what causes them" and "I cannot stress this enough -- we are not in a position to confidently attribute past climate change to carbon dioxide or to forecast what the climate will be in the future." I believe he knows of what he speaks, and has NOTHING TO GAIN by saying the debate is not over yet.

With regard to fact #2: There are, today, hundreds of flood victims in Iowa who are BARRED by the government from re-entering their own mud-filled homes, because the EPA has sealed off their houses as toxic waste sites. Folks, these toxins merely washed down into their homes from the surrounding land that grows much of food we consume. It's rather frightening to contemplate the whole concept: those we entrust to protect us say it is safe to spray these toxins on our cornfields, yet it is now unsafe for Joe Farmer to shovel out of his living room, that it must be remediated by a hazmat crew? Yikes!

re: Why Did 32,000 Scientists Sign a Petition Dissenting From Global-Warming Consensus?

earlw — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 13:57:12 GMT

I follow the Warming and many other geo-political issues as well in addition to Dr. Mecola's dailies.This is a very important blog, in my view, since more than just health issues are covered. Having said that, I would like to leave this URL for anyone that thinks it's as simple as global warming or this or that...This video says so much,it will fill in some of the questions about Big oil, Government, and Big Business. It's not health related directly, but it's ancillary effects would affect health through stress if nothing else......

Here it is.....75 minutes long....stick with it....I await you commentary...The energy non-crisis is also a book.

.video.google.com/videoplay

re: Why Did 32,000 Scientists Sign a Petition Dissenting From Global-Warming Consensus?

johammond — Sat, 14 Jun 2008 21:03:53 GMT

My husband and I think this is one of the most sensible articles on the subject that we've seen. If the trillions of dollars that the world is proposing to spend on the warming were spent more sensibly, the world would be a far better place in short order.

Congratulations,

*** and Jo Hammond

re: Why Did 32,000 Scientists Sign a Petition Dissenting From Global-Warming Consensus?

tech_man — Sat, 14 Jun 2008 10:59:07 GMT

I have a couple of points to make:

1. Do those of you who discredit the man induced global warming theory really expect the world to accept any other hypothesis ? When organizations such as NASA, the Royal Society, the American Meteorological Society and others all back this theory can you really expect our governments to ignore them and go with what a few people believe ? Let's all pull together to fight this thing. If you are really passionate about another theory, educate yourself and work hard to convince the scientific community you are right; they're the one's you need to convince. If not join the rest of us and find ways of reducing your carbon footprint. The good doctor should realize that the above organizations are not the FDA or AMA and are not necessarily motivated by the same reasons. Sure the man-induced GW theory may be wrong but a surprising number of people who have devoted their lives to studying such things support it and it's the best theory we have. Let's pull together to fight this thing.

2. Being a scientist (electrical engineering) I've experienced the peer review system having submitted and reviewed many papers myself. When a paper is received it sent to several others in the field who have previously published, their comments collected and a decision made whether or not to publish. If you disagree you can argue the point. I think this system is about as fair as possible and deserves our respect.

re: Why Did 32,000 Scientists Sign a Petition Dissenting From Global-Warming Consensus?

swb — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 21:52:56 GMT

To dickt39

As to your comments about the economy already being ruined, you are wrong on so many points! Your argument is convoluted. It is the price of oil which is ruining our economy! You have absolutely no idea what America is about to experience in the way of an economic malaise, from our INABILITY to produce our own oil/gasoline at a reasonable price! We are not some piddly little country where the majority of people even have the option to walk, or ride a bike to work. WE NEED OUR CARS! I for one have done all I can to keep from having to purchase any more gas than I have to. I don't go for Sunday drives just for the heck of it. Most people I know don't either.

Are you saying that All Americans must be forced to move to a large city with mass transit, and to heck with anyone who doesn't? Are you actually saying that we ought to go back to horse and buggy days?

What is your vision of a green world?

Yes! I want to keep my standard of living, keep my house, and drive my car to work. Assuming that there is still a job to drive to!

re: Why Did 32,000 Scientists Sign a Petition Dissenting From Global-Warming Consensus?

Veslemor — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 16:05:43 GMT

Scientists agree that humans are responsible for coral bleaching; we are killing the oceans.

Humans introduced chemicals to the environment that put a hole in the ozone layer.

If we can produce these huge scale calamities, why is it so hard for some people to immagine that our activities are contributing to, if not causing, global warming?

re: Why Did 32,000 Scientists Sign a Petition Dissenting From Global-Warming Consensus?

actionnottalk — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 07:20:46 GMT

To all,

A little learning is a dang'rous thing;

Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring

re: Why Did 32,000 Scientists Sign a Petition Dissenting From Global-Warming Consensus?

Douglas_Copeland — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 23:58:59 GMT

I WAS

re: Why Did 32,000 Scientists Sign a Petition Dissenting From Global-Warming Consensus?

hunter with my dogs — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 21:16:06 GMT

i am so happy to read this comment from mercola. why wont al gore debate the issue? maybe al is too busy spending over 300 million to advertise the lie and profit his companies he is invested in that promote this global warming. this is a fear based religion of pure incorrect statements. the biggest cost to our country and the world is ignorance. how much pollution does volcano produce? mankind is just a blink of the eye to the age of the world.