Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.
Global Warming Alarmism a bigger threat than Global Warming?
businessandmedia.org — Lord Christopher Monckton, international consultant and former policy advisor to British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher intelligently lashes out against Global Warming doomsayers, likening their initiatives to the banning of DDT (which was responsible for the deaths of some 40 million African children) and saying the scare was likely near an end.
bullcutter- 7 diggs
- digg it
- Isidore, on 03/04/2008, -2/+2Should I trust scragged or the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) regarding climate change?
The vast majority of climate scientists believe that humans are now a major cause of climate change.
The issue is a scientific one, based on observations. As individuals we can each study the evidence to post-doctoral level. Or, if we do not have the talent or time the next best thing is to rely on the consensus of those who have studied the matter in depth. If you were ill would you trust scragged or someone who studied medicine for many years? Doctors and scientists are not infallible. If one maverick doctor disagrees with the consensus would trust your life to them or the majority opinion?
Who are the real experts? Is there enough evidence for them to come to a valid consensus conclusion? National Science Academies should be able to identify the real experts and whether there is a consensus.
The National Scientific Academies of the following countries issued this statement in support of the IPCC
“The work of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) represents the consensus of the international scientific community on climate change science. We recognise IPCC as the world’s most reliable source of information on climate change and its causes, and we endorse its method of achieving this consensus. Despite increasing consensus on the science underpinning predictions of global climate change, doubts have been expressed recently about the need to mitigate the risks posed by global climate change. We do not consider such doubts justified.”
National Academy of Sciences (US),
Royal Society (United Kingdom),
Chinese Academy of Sciences,
Science Council of Japan,
Russian Academy of Sciences,
Academia Brasiliera de Ciências (Brazil),
Royal Society of Canada,
Académie des Sciences (France),
Deutsche Akademie der Naturforscher Leopoldina (Germany),
Indian National Science Academy,
Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei (Italy),
Australian Academy of Sciences,
Royal Flemish Academy of Belgium for Sciences and the Arts,
Caribbean Academy of Sciences,
Indonesian Academy of Sciences,
Royal Irish Academy,
Academy of Sciences Malaysia,
Academy Council of the Royal Society of New Zealand,
Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences.
Source: http://www.royalsociety.org/displaypagedoc.asp?id= ... Royal Society 2001
http://www.royalsoc.ac.uk/displaypagedoc.asp?id=20 ... Royal Society 2005
http://www.globalwarmingart.com/wiki/Statements_on ... For the comments of other scientific bodies.
American Geophysical Union position paper Human Impacts on climate.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7207335.stm
"Evidence from most oceans and all continents except Antarctica shows warming attributable to human activities. ... With climate change, as with ozone depletion, the human footprint on Earth is apparent."
http://www.agu.org/sci_soc/policy/positions/climat ... - Isidore, on 03/04/2008, -2/+1No one on the IPCC doubts that there are cycles and natural factors. The question is whether the global warming observed since the mid 1970's has a significant human cause. The IPCC says yes with 90% certainty.
Natural causes alone (Milankovitch cycles, sunspots, solar activity, volcanoes etc.), cannot explain climate variations since the mid 1970s http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/hadleycentre/ ...
but adding human causes we get a prediction much closer to observations http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/hadleycentre/ ...
Sir David Attenborough was once a climate skeptic, believing that all global warming can all be explained by natural causes and cycles. He changed his mind, this is why http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9ob9WdbXx0 (3 mins)
The hypothesis that natural causes alone explain recent climate change has been falsified.
Can the deniers produce a climate model using natural factors alone which explains recent global warming?- headkace, on 03/05/2008, -0/+1Yes. See here: http://www.oism.org/pproject/Slides/Presentation/S ... . Then read the entire paper, if you dare, here: http://www.oism.org/pproject/s33p36.htm .
Stop arguing by authority and look at the facts yourself.
- headkace, on 03/05/2008, -0/+1Yes. See here: http://www.oism.org/pproject/Slides/Presentation/S ... . Then read the entire paper, if you dare, here: http://www.oism.org/pproject/s33p36.htm .
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by