Ok, not that it’ll matter much, however to the list of over 1000 “scientists” who don’t support the anthropomorphic global warming egoteneoism, we can now add Nobel Prize winners.
Dr. Ivar Giaever (one of Obuma’s “scientific supporters” in 2008) won the Nobel for physics, now has actually resigned from the American Physical Society (APS), saying that he cannot live with the APS statement on global warming: “The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring, If no mitigating actions are taken, significant disruptions in the Earth’s physical and ecological systems, social systems, security and human health are likely to occur. We must reduce emissions of greenhouse gasses beginning now.” Dr Giaever wrote, “In the APS it is ok to discuss whether the mass of the proton changes over time and how a multi-universe behaves, but the evidence of global warming is incontrovertible? The claim (how can you measure the average temperature of the whole earth for a whole year?) is that the temperature has changed from ~288.0 to ~288.8 degree Kelvin in about 150 years, which (if true) means to me is that the temperature has been amazingly stable, and both human health and happiness have definitely improved in this ‘warming’ period.” The one thing Dr. Giaever said which excites me personally is, “Global warming has become a new religion…“ and, to the NYT, global warming “can’t be discussed, just like religion…” Statements which nicely support my egoteneoism theory whether he’s right or wrong.
Turns out Giaever isn’t the only “scientist” who resigned. Another, Hal Lewis, physicist said, “Climategate was a fraud on a scale I have never seen… This is not a science”.
Another Nobel winner Dr. Laughlin rejected this in 2010, and said, “Climate is beyond our power to control… Climate change is a matter of geologic time, something that the Earth routinely does on its own without asking anyone’s permission or explaining itself… Suppose you are very serious about making a dent in carbon emissions and could replace about 10% of the world’s energy sources with
non-CO2-emitting nuclear power by 2020 — roughly equivalent to halving U.S. emissions. Based on IPCC-like projections, the required 1,000 new nuclear power plants would slow the warming by about 0.2176 degrees Fahrenheit per century. It’s a dent… My experience as a missionary teacher in Africa opened my eyes to this simple fact: Without access to energy, life is brutal and short. The uncertain impacts of global warming far in the future must be weighed against disasters at our doorsteps today. Bjorn Lomborg’s Copenhagen Consensus 2004, a cost-benefit analysis of health issues by leading economists (including three Nobelists), calculated that spending on health issues such as micronutrients for children, HIV/AIDS and water purification has benefits 50 to 200 times those of attempting to marginally limit ‘global warming.’ Given the scientific uncertainty and our relative impotence regarding climate change, the moral imperative here seems clear to me.”
Dr Borlaug, the father of the “Green Revolution” and another Nobel winner said “…is this another one of those natural cycles that have brought on glaciers and cause melting of glaciers?”
John Christy, director of the Earth System Science Center at the UofA was reported by the Wall Street Journal as believing that it is not a proven fact that global warming is human caused, and he is refusing his share of the Nobel price because it is “based on a misunderstanding of science… The other half of the prize was awarded to former Vice President Al Gore, whose carbon footprint would stomp my neighborhood flat. But that’s another story. Large icebergs in the Weddell Sea, Antarctica. Winter sea ice around the continent set a record maximum last month.
On the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment & Public Works website is posted an article entitled “UN Blowback: More Than 650 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims” The article continues to increase the number to ‘More than 700 International scientists dissent over man global warming claims. See the full article here: http://epw.senate
Even the Deseret News in utah sports an article entitled “More scientists speak out against global warming” which begins, “Americans have been rope-a-doped into believing that global warming is going to destroy our planet. Scientists who have been skeptical about man-made global warming have been called traitors or handmaidens of big oil.” (Walter Williams) and continues later with, “The global warming scare has provided a field day for politicians and others who wish to control our lives. After all, only the imagination limits the kind of laws and restrictions that can be written in the name of saving the planet… It is a blatant lie put forth in the media that makes it seem there is only a fringe of scientists who don’t buy into anthropogenic global warming.” (Walter Williams)
Try this.. global cooling, Geologist Dr. Don J. Easterbrook, emeritus professor at Western Washington University, says, “Recent solar changes suggest that it could be fairly severe, perhaps more like the 1880 to 1915 cool cycle than the more moderate 1945-1977 cool cycle.”
Geologist Dr. David Gee, chairman of the science committee of the 2008 International Geological Congress, currently at Uppsala University in Sweden, asks, “For how many years must the planet cool before we begin to understand that the planet is not warming? For how many years must cooling go on?”
Hard for me to get to serious about the dreadful global warming “problem” which government, internationally (new international order?) is using to ramp up it’s power grab. Which magnificent environmentally conscious heroes such as Al Gore are using to make millions (look at how magnificently his internet invention has gone!). But it does give me increased confidence in my own philosophy of egoteneoism. Just for kicks Google “Religion AND global warming” and check out the response.
~Bacon
ibaconi 