Posted on 06/30/2013 12:37:47 PM PDT by Brad from Tennessee
Editor's Note: The following has been signed by the 16 scientists listed at the end of the article:
A candidate for public office in any contemporary democracy may have to consider what, if anything, to do about "global warming." Candidates should understand that the oft-repeated claim that nearly all scientists demand that something dramatic be done to stop global warming is not true. In fact, a large and growing number of distinguished scientists and engineers do not agree that drastic actions on global warming are needed.
In September, Nobel Prize-winning physicist Ivar Giaever, a supporter of President Obama in the last election, publicly resigned from the American Physical Society (APS) with a letter that begins: "I did not renew [my membership] because I cannot live with the [APS policy] statement: '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 gases beginning now.' 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?"
In spite of a multidecade international campaign to enforce the message that increasing amounts of the "pollutant" carbon dioxide will destroy civilization, large numbers of scientists, many very prominent, share the opinions of Dr. Giaever. And the number of scientific "heretics" is growing with each passing year. The reason is a collection of stubborn scientific facts.
Perhaps the most inconvenient fact is the lack of global warming for well over 10 years now. . .
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
did I follow the wrong link? the WSJ says this article was from January 2012
OK!! Everybody pay attention!
Lesson for today:
1. The sun is 1,300,000 times as big as the earth.
2. The sun is a ball of fire that controls our climates.
3. The earth is a rock.
4. The earth is a speck in comparison to the size of the sun.
5. Inhabitants of the earth are less than specks.
Study Question: How do less-than-specks in congress plan to control the sun?
“Study Question: How do less-than-specks in congress plan to control the sun?”
Answer: It doesn’t make a difference who’s in Congress as long as the President thinks he’s “a god”.
It’s not about the climate.
It’s about money, power, and control.
The “scientists” who have allowed themselves to be used by politicians like Obama, and by scammers like Al Gore, are no different or better than whores.
They have traded their integrity and credibility for a small financial pittance, a meaningless pat on the head and a fleeting moment on the stage.
While channel surfing, my physicist husband, happened to find a global warming documentary by Jesse Ventura. Sure, Jesse’s got some problems, but the people who researched the subject did some great work debunking the scam. DH said it was excellent and gets into the financial aspects of the cult.
For three years he had been surrounded by whack-job colleagues worshipping global warming at a .gov facility, and it made him crazy. The few people like him who knew the truth didn’t dare speak up or make waves; there’d have been hell to pay. Now he’s retired and can relax.
An excellent article countering the global-baloney warming gospel that is being spread.
It is no wonder that Obozo is buying into this hoax...it is what I expect from a Community Organizer.
Global warming is a hoax, a fraud, and a scam. It isn’t about science, it’s about political power.
Just once I want to hear one of these “climate scientists” explain what the weather across the planet was like leading up to one of the ice ages.
Thanks for the ping!
Thanks for the glow-bull warming ping.
While the Hurricane Sandy cleanup was underway last fall both Michael Bloomberg and Barack Obama blamed the storm on “global warming” despite statements from NOAA, NASA, the National Weather Service and the National Hurricane Center that climate change had negligible effect in producing the storm.
NOAA said “Superstorm Sandy” resulted from the random interaction of a late season hurricane and a northeaster.
Martin Hoerling, who chairs NOAA’s climate variability research program explained: “In this case, the immediate cause is most likely little more than the coincidental alignment of a tropical storm with an extratropical storm. Both frequent the west Atlantic in October—nothing unusual with that. On rare occasions their timing is such as to result in an interaction which can lead to an extreme event along the eastern seaboard.”
Bloomberg is mayor of the most vital city in the U.S. Obama is “leader of the free world.” Yet they both talk like scientific illiterates because they are preaching a political line.
H-m-m-m-m
Who to believe? Who to believe?
The growing number of brave scientists relying on stubborn facts? Or the liberal politicians interested in power and picking our pockets?
H-m-m-m-m
Not a hard decision.
.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.