Washington, Nov 2, 2007 -

QUOTES FROM NOTED SCIENTISTS
ON CLIMATE CHANGE
Bold is added in quoted passages to emphasize points.

Distorted Science
Undue Pressure and Influence
Kyoto
Cost
Sea Level Change
IPCC Climate Models
Temperature Change vs.CO2 Change
Biographies

Distorted Science
The pursuit of project funding, recognition and political advantage among their peers encourages scientists to go along with the alleged findings of the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and others motivating them to exaggerate the need for their work.

Dr. Petr Chylek

"Scientists who want to attract attention to themselves, who want to attract great funding to themselves, have to (find a) way to scare the public…and this you can achieve only by making things bigger and more dangerous than they really are."

Dr. Patrick Michaels

"The notion that we must do 'something in 10 years' repeated by a small but vocal band of extremists, enjoys virtually no support in the truly peer reviewed scientific literature."

Dr. Bjorn Lomborg

"Its fear-mongering arguments have been sensationalized, which is ultimately only likely to make the world worse off."

Dr. Christopher Landsea
Dr. Landsea wrote an open letter withdrawing from the IPCC because of politicization of his work on the committee. The first and last paragraphs of that letter are below.

17 January 2005
Dear Colleagues,
After some prolonged deliberation, I have decided to withdraw from participating in the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). I am withdrawing because I have come to view the part of the IPCC to which my expertise is relevant as having become politicized. In addition, when I have raised my concerns to the IPCC leadership, their response was simply to dismiss my concerns…
…I personally cannot in good faith continue to contribute to a process that I view as both being motivated by pre-conceived agendas and being scientifically unsound. As the IPCC leadership has seen no wrong in Dr. Trenberth's actions and have retained him as a Lead Author for the AR4, I have decided to no longer participate in the IPCC AR4.
Sincerely,
Chris Landsea

Dr. William Grey
Quote from an article in Discover, vol. 26 no. 9, September 2005

"So many people have a vested interest in this global-warming thing-all these big labs and research and stuff. The idea is to frighten the public, to get money to study it more." "Researchers pound the global warming drum because they know there is politics, and money behind it."

Undue Pressure and Influence
Undue pressure and influence have caused scientist to be denied funding and to even be terminated. Peer pressure is a more subtle method of reducing the opposition to those who won't go along.

Dr. William Grey
Quote from an interview in Discover Magazine, September 2005

Title: "Weather Seer: 'We're Lucky'"
"Are your funding problems due in part to your views?
"G: I can't be sure, but I think that's a lot of the reason. I have been around 50 years, so my views on this are well known. I had NOAA money for 30 some years, and then when the Clinton administration came in and Gore started directing some of the environmental stuff, I was cut off. I couldn't get any NOAA money. They turned down 13 straight proposals from me."

Dr. Richard Lindzen
Wall Street Journal Op/Ed April 12, 2006; Page A14

"In Europe, Henk Tennekes was dismissed as research director of the Royal Dutch Meteorological Society after questioning the scientific underpinnings of global warming."

"Alarm rather than genuine scientific curiosity, it appears, is essential to maintaining funding. And only the most senior scientists today can stand up against this alarmist gale, and defy the iron triangle of climate scientists, advocates and policymakers." Wall Street Journal Op/Ed April 12, 2006; Page A14

Dr. William Happer Jr. After two years as the Director of Research at the U.S. Department of Energy, Dr. Happer claims he was asked to resign.

"I was told that science was not going to intrude on policy."
"With regard to global climate issues, we are experiencing politically correct science. Many atmospheric scientists are afraid for their funding, which is why they don't challenge Al Gore and his colleagues. They have a pretty clear idea of what the answer they're supposed to get is. The attitude in the administration is, 'If you get a wrong result, we don't want to hear about it."

Dr. Hendrik (Henk) Tennekes

"I protest against overwhelming pressure to adhere to the climate change dogma promoted by the adherents of IPCC….The advantages of accepting a dogma or paradigm are only too clear…. One no longer has to query the foundations of one's convictions, one enjoys the many advantages of belonging to a group that enjoys political power, one can participate in the benefits that the group provides, and one can delegate questions of responsibility and accountability to the leadership. In brief, the moment one accepts a dogma, one stops being an independent scientist."

Kyoto
Some scientists have reflected on the ineffectiveness of the Kyoto Protocol

Dr. Patrick Michaels
"Live With Climate Change," USA Today, February 2, 2007

"The journal Geophysical Research Letters estimated in 1997 that if every nation on Earth lived up to the United Nations' Kyoto Protocol on global warming, it would prevent no more than 0.126 degrees F of warming every 50 years. Global temperature varies by more than that from year to year, so that's not even enough to measure. Climatically, Kyoto would do nothing."

Jerry Taylor and Dr.Peter Van Doren "The Public Won't Pay for Global Warming Legislation" Tampa Tribune, January 31, 2007

"Signatories to the Kyoto Protocol are finding that their low cost, free lunch compliance strategies are yielding squat. The United Nations reported late last month that greenhouse gas emissions from countries that promised emissions reductions under the Kyoto Protocol increased by 4.1 percent from 2000 to 2004 (the most recent year for which we have reliable data). U.S. emissions, by contrast, were up only 1.3 percent over that same period."

Dr. Fred Singer

"There is no dispute at all about the fact that even if punctiliously observed, [the Kyoto Protocol] would have an imperceptible effect on future temperatures - one twentieth of a degree by 2050," Singer observes."

Cost
The cost of dealing with the alleged climate change problem is huge losing the opportunity to direct resources to immediate, real world problems especially those in third world nations

Dr. Patrick Michaels "Live With Climate Change", USA Today, February 2, 2007

"The stark reality is that if we really want to alter the warming trajectory of the planet significantly, we have to cut emissions by an extremely large amount, and - a truth that everyone must know - we simply do not have the technology to do so. We would fritter away billions in precious investment capital in a futile attempt to curtail warming"

Jerry Taylor and Dr.Peter Van Doren Quote from an article "Global Warming Insurance is a Bad Buy" in National Review (Online), November 20, 2006.

"The direct costs associated with greenhouse gas emission controls include avoidable deaths in the developing world. The United Nations, for example, reports that about 2 million people on this planet die every year because they don't have electricity and must burn biomass for heating and cooking. This results in greatly elevated levels of indoor air pollutants and premature deaths. Increasing the cost of electricity - an unavoidable consequence of ridding the global economy of the fossil fuels that generate greenhouse gases - will slow our ability to conquer this problem."
"Putting a stop to global warming would require Herculean social and economic change, and the economic costs associated with those changes are steep - an annual $1,154 per household in the United States, according to the recently released Stern Review."

Dr. Fred Singer
Quote From an article "No Evidence For Human-Caused Global Warming" Published in the New York Sun, Feb. 2, 2007

"Crucially, greenhouse models cannot explain the observed patterns of warming - temperature trends at different latitudes and altitudes. These data, published in a U.S. government scientific report in May 2006, lead us to conclude that the human contribution is not significant. Most of current warming must therefore stem from natural causes. …."
"If indeed most of current warming is natural rather than from greenhouse gases, there is little point in reducing carbon-dioxide emissions. Further, carbon dioxide is not an atmospheric pollutant. Programs and policies for carbon dioxide control should therefore be scrapped - including uneconomic alternative energy sources, carbon-sequestration efforts, and costly emission-trading schemes. All of these waste money and squander scarce resources, without in any way affecting the atmosphere or climate. …"

Dr. Timothy Ball
Quote from "Global Warming: The Cold, Hard Facts?"
The Canadian Free Press (online) Monday, February 5, 2007

Believe it or not, Global Warming is not due to human contribution of Carbon Dioxide (CO2). This in fact is the greatest deception in the history of science.We are wasting time, energy and trillions of dollars while creating unnecessary fear and consternation over an issue with no scientific justification.For example, Environment Canada brags about spending $3.7 billion in the last five years dealing with climate change almost all on propaganda trying to defend an indefensible scientific position while at the same time closing weather stations and failing to meet legislated pollution targets.

Sea Level Change
There have been estimates of sea level change from about 6 inches to over 20 feet from the scientific community The higher levels are conditioned by tipping points which are based on scanty evidence and speculation.

Dr. Patrick Michaels
Quote from an article "Global Warming: So What Else Is New?" in the San Francisco Chronicle on February 2nd, 2007.

"As measured recently by satellite, and published in Science magazine, Greenland is losing .0004% of its ice per year, or 0.4% per century. All modern computer models require nearly 1000 years of carbon concentrations three times what they are today to melt the majority of Greenland's ice. Does anyone seriously believe we will be a fossil-fuel powered society in, say, the year 2500?"
"A small but very vocal band of extremists have been hawking a doomsday scenario, in which Greenland suddenly melts, raising sea levels 12 feet or more by 2100." "…it is repeated everywhere, and its supporters are already claiming that the IPCC" … "is now wrong because it has toned down its projections of doom and gloom".

Dr. Mitchell Taylor

"Of 13 populations of polar bears in Canada, 11 are stable or increasing in number. They are not going extinct, or even appear to be affected at present."

IPCC Climate Models
Models do not match the complex real world which is sensitive to unknown and poorly understood factors. Models are constantly tweaked showing significant differences in outcomes among themselves and, most importantly between them and the historic real world scenario.

Dr. Christopher Horner
Quote from his book Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming:

"… the dirtiest secret of all regarding climate models: When we attempt to test them, they fail miserably."

Dr. Patrick Michaels
Quote from his book Unstoppable Global Warming:

"It is scientific malpractice to use them [climate models]. I choose my words carefully here. If a physician prescribed medication that demonstrably did not work, he would lose his license."

Dr. Fred Singer

"The models have erroneously predicted a 20th century surge in the Earth's temperatures to match surging CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere. It hasn't happened."

Dr. Richard Lindzen
Quote from the Sunday Telegraph October 30 2006

"As the primary "consensus" document, the Scientific Assessment of the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change notes, modellers at the United Kingdom's Hadley Centre had to cancel two-thirds of the model warming in order to simulate the observed warming.
"So the warming alarm is based on models that overestimate the observed warming by a factor of three or more, and have to cancel most of the warming in order to match observations."
"The temperature is as likely to go down as up."

Dr. Kevin Trenberth

"None of the models used by IPCC are initialized to the observed state and none of the climate states in the models correspond even remotely to the current observed climate. In particular, the state of the oceans, sea ice, and soil moisture has no relationship to the observed state at any recent time in any of the IPCC models."

Temperature change vs. CO2 change

Although carbon dioxide is known to trap infrared energy in simple lab tests, the Earth has many feedback, heat exchange and even chemical mechanisms that can temper this straight forward process.

Timothy Ball
Quote from the Politics of Global Warming interview in the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review

"… in the theory the claim is that if CO2 goes up, temperature will go up. The ice core record of the last 420,000 years shows exactly the opposite. It shows that the temperature changes before the CO2. So the fundamental assumption of the theory is wrong. That means the theory is wrong."

Dr. Ken Calderia

"Geo-engineering schemes have been proposed as a cheap fix that could let us have our cake and eat it, too. But geo-engineering schemes are not well understood. Our study shows that planet-sized geo-engineering means planet-sized risks."

Biographies

Dr. Timothy Ball, Chairman of the Natural Resources Stewardship Project (www.nrsp.com), is a Victoria-based environmental consultant and former climatology professor at the University of Winnipeg.

Dr. Ken Caldeira is a scientist at the Carnegie Institution's department of global ecology.

Dr. Petr Chylek is a member of the technical staff at Space and Remote Sensing Sciences, Los Alamos National Laboratory and an Adjunct professor of Physics and Atmospheric Science, Dalhousie University, Halifax and New Mexico State University He received his, Ph. D., Physics University of California, Riverside, California in 1970 Dr. Chylek is a Optical Society of America: Fellow and a member of the American Meteorological Society.

Dr. William M. Gray is a world famous hurricane expert and emeritus Professor of Atmospheric Science, Colorado State University.

Dr. William Happer was appointed in 1991 by President George Bush to be Director of Energy Research in the Department of Energy and served until 1993. On his return to Princeton, he was named Eugene Higgins Professor of Physics and Chair of the University Research Board. Dr. Happer is a Fellow of the American Physical Society, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, the National Academy of Sciences and the American Philosophical Society.

Dr. Christopher C. Horner serves as a Senior Fellow at Competitive Enterprise Institute in which capacity he oversees petitions and litigation on topics including data access and quality laws, the Freedom of Information Act, and government science and agency statutory compliance, and other legal matters involving environment and energy issues, international environmental treaties, and climate policy. He is the author of "The Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming and Environmentalism" (Regnery, 2007). A practicing attorney in Washington, D.C., Mr. Horner works on a legal and policy level with numerous think tanks and policy organizations throughout the world.

Dr.Christopher Landsea, formerly a research meteorologist with Hurricane Research Division of Atlantic Oceanographic & Meteorological Laboratory at NOAA, is now the Science and Operations Officer at the National Hurricane Center. He is a member of the American Geophysical Union and the American Meteorological Society. He earned his doctoral degree in Atmospheric Science at Colorado State University.

Dr. Richard Lindzen is an atmospheric physicist, the Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at MIT and a member of the National Academy of Science Lindzen is known for his research in dynamic meteorology - especially atmospheric waves.

Dr. Bjorn Lomborg is adjunct professor at the Copenhagen Business School, and author of the best-selling "The Skeptical Environmentalist", where he challenges our understanding of the environment, and points out how we need to focus our attention on the most important problems first. In May 2004 he organized the "Copenhagen Consensus" which brought together some of the world's top economists. Here they prioritized the best opportunities to the world's big challenges

Dr. Patrick Michaels is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute and a research professor of environmental sciences at the University of Virginia. He is a past president of the American Association of State Climatologists and was program chair for the Committee on Applied Climatology of the American Meteorological Society.

Dr Fred Singer, an atmospheric physicist, is professor emeritus of environmental sciences at the University of Virginia, adjunct scholar at the National Center for Policy Analysis, and former director of the U.S. Weather Satellite Service. He is also a research fellow at the Independent Institute.

Jerry Taylor is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute where he researches environmental policy.

Dr. Mitchell Taylor is a Polar Bear Biologist, Department of the Environment, Government of Nunavut, Igloolik.

Hendrik (Henk) Tennekes is formerly director of research at the Royal Dutch Meteorological Institute and a professor of aeronautical engineering at Penn State. Tennekes pioneered methods of multi-modal forecasting.

Dr. Kevin E. Trenberth is Head of the Climate Analysis Section at the National Center for Atmospheric Research. He has published over 400 scientific articles or papers, including 40 books or book chapters.

Dr. Peter Van Doren is editor of Regulation magazine and a senior fellow at the Cato Institute.