Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Climate Change Debate: A Famous Scientist Becomes a Skeptic
Spiegel Online ^ | May 12, 2014 | Axel Bojanowski

Posted on 05/13/2014 5:31:32 PM PDT by rottndog

The debate over climate change is often a contentious one, and key players in the discussion only rarely switch sides. But late last month, Lennart Bengtsson, the former director of the Hamburg-based Max Planck Institute for Meteorology, one of the world's leading climate research centers, announced he would join the academic advisory council of the Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF).

GWPF, based in Britain, is a non-profit organization and self-described think tank. Conservative politician Nigel Lawson founded the organization in 2009 in order to counteract what he considered to be an exaggerated concern about global warming. The organization uses aggressive information campaigns to pursue its goals. The lobby group's views markedly differ from those of the UN climate panel, the IPCC, whose reports are the products of the work of hundreds of scientists who classify and analyze vast amounts of climate knowledge accumulated through years of research. The most recent IPCC report states that man-made emissions of greenhouse gases are leading to significant global warming, with serious environmental consequences.

Bengtsson was known for maintaining moderate positions even during the most vitriolic debates over global warming during the 1990s. In an interview with SPIEGEL ONLINE, he discusses why he made the shift to the skeptics' camp.

(Excerpt) Read more at spiegel.de ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: bengtsson; climatechange; globallwarming; globullwarming
Swedish meteorologist Lennart Bengtsson, born in 1935, served as director of the European Center for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts in England from 1981 to 1990 and then as director of the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology in Hamburg, one of the world's leading climate research centers. Since his retirement in 2000, he has worked as a professor at the University of Reading in Britain. Bengtsson has been the recipient of numerous awards including the prestigious German Environmental Prize bestowed by the German Federal Environmental Foundation (DBU). His work is focused largely on climate modelling and weather.

Obviously, he's been bought off by big oil....
1 posted on 05/13/2014 5:31:32 PM PDT by rottndog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: rottndog
Key point from the article:

Bengtsson: I have not changed my view on a fundamental level. I have never seen myself as an alarmist but rather as a scientist with a critical viewpoint, and in that sense I have always been a skeptic. I have devoted most of my career to developing models for predicting the weather, and in doing so I have learned the importance of validating forecasts against observed weather. As a result, that's an approach I strongly favor for "climate predictions." It's essential to validate model results, especially when dealing with complex systems such as the climate. It's essential do so properly if such predictions are to be considered credible.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: You think there's a need for climate research to do some catching up in this regard?

Bengtsson: It is frustrating that climate science is not able to validate their simulations correctly. Since the end of the 20th century, the warming of the Earth has been much weaker than what climate models show.
2 posted on 05/13/2014 5:33:51 PM PDT by rottndog ('Live Free Or Die' Ain't just words on a bumber sticker...or a tagline.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rottndog
Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF).

I hope any studies to be produced by this foundation get GlowBull warming funding and grants. After all, the foundation itself was formed due to GlowBull warming.

3 posted on 05/13/2014 5:37:28 PM PDT by C210N (When people fear government there is tyranny; when government fears people there is liberty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rottndog

http://www.nbcnews.com/science/environment/get-reality-check-antarctic-meltdown-rising-sea-level-n104616


4 posted on 05/13/2014 5:40:21 PM PDT by Beowulf9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rottndog

Earth’s temperature has gone through cycles of changes, and it will continue to do so. The only question is do humans contribute anything to the current warming trend?


5 posted on 05/13/2014 5:46:06 PM PDT by Fishing-guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rottndog

Ask some geologists about current theories. They will tell you that climate stability is an illusion aided by our short lifespans and impatience. We are still at historic lows re. CO2 and have a long ways to go before we even approach the normal, pre Himalayan levels (as if anything is normal in earth history).


6 posted on 05/13/2014 5:49:01 PM PDT by JimSEA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rottndog

Love these skeptics.


7 posted on 05/13/2014 5:50:44 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (Part of my continuing education.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: JimSEA

“Pre Himalayan levels.” Is that when dinosaurs return? LOL


8 posted on 05/13/2014 5:53:08 PM PDT by Fishing-guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Fishing-guy

The answer to that question can be answered by looking up into the sky at about 2pm on a sunny day, it’s that huge glowing ball of burning gas in the sky.


9 posted on 05/13/2014 5:54:17 PM PDT by 5th MEB (Progressives in the open; --- FIRE FOR EFFECT!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: rottndog
Here's a good link with a conglomeration of articles showing the failure of climate models:

97% of climate models say that 97% of climate scientists are wrong
10 posted on 05/13/2014 5:55:04 PM PDT by rottndog ('Live Free Or Die' Ain't just words on a bumber sticker...or a tagline.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fishing-guy

More likely, those mountains are a huge carbon sink.


11 posted on 05/13/2014 5:59:13 PM PDT by JimSEA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: rottndog

"Heretic! Non-believer!"


12 posted on 05/13/2014 6:02:32 PM PDT by COBOL2Java (I'm a Christian, pro-life, pro-gun, Reaganite. The GOP hates me. Why should I vote for them?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rottndog

We all know it is not real. It is ploy to dumb down this country for the “good of all mankind”. Resist it ,crush it like a bug. Vomit out environmentalists,


13 posted on 05/13/2014 6:08:42 PM PDT by SADMILLIE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rottndog

The real question that no one asks, and can’t be answered either, is what exactly should the Earth’s climate be?


14 posted on 05/13/2014 6:10:35 PM PDT by 3boysdad (The very elect.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 3boysdad

Very good.


15 posted on 05/13/2014 6:36:33 PM PDT by Magic Fingers (Political correctness mutates in order to remain virulent.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: rottndog

His so old he’ll be dead soon. Are there any young, honest scientists?


16 posted on 05/13/2014 6:43:09 PM PDT by 1010RD (First, Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Fishing-guy

Well, it’s mid-May and 57 degrees in Houston suburbs. I may contribute to warming tonight by turning my fireplace on.


17 posted on 05/13/2014 6:43:53 PM PDT by Grams A (The Sun will rise in the East in the morning and God is still on his throne.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: 3boysdad

That’s a great question and one you could ask them about all kinds of environmental questions. All Leftist responses to the environment are status quo. No change, ever... once they’re cozy in their villa.


18 posted on 05/13/2014 6:45:32 PM PDT by 1010RD (First, Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: rottndog

Huh. Who asks scientists about science anymore, now that we have politicians and actors and rock stars?


19 posted on 05/13/2014 6:46:43 PM PDT by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 1010RD

His so old he’ll be dead soon. Are there any young, honest scientists?


Death bed skeptics have historically been denied thoughtful consideration.


20 posted on 05/13/2014 6:47:30 PM PDT by Zeneta (Thoughts in time and out of season.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: rottndog

And his degree is in meteorology.

He’s not an electrical engineer like the guy who claims the antarctic is melting.


21 posted on 05/13/2014 6:48:25 PM PDT by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 3boysdad
The real question that no one asks, and can’t be answered either, is what exactly should the Earth’s climate be?

And they always say that that is irrelevant...it's the speed and scale of the climate change that matters.
22 posted on 05/13/2014 6:53:35 PM PDT by rottndog ('Live Free Or Die' Ain't just words on a bumber sticker...or a tagline.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: JimSEA

I’ll tell you a little secret about carbon...CO2 does not conduct heat as well as air.

At night, CO2 and air cool down to ambient temperature...but during daylight, air heats up faster than does CO2.

That’s a fancy way of saying that CO2 is cooler than air during the day.

The more CO2 displaces air in our atmosphere, the less our atmosphere heats up each day.

CO2 *does* have a greenhouse effect (you can see that impact on Mars), but it has *less* of a greenhouse effect than does air.

And that is a dirty little secret...the truth against The Big Lie being told about CO2 emissions.

They cool (compared to air).


23 posted on 05/13/2014 6:53:41 PM PDT by Southack (The one thing preppers need from the 1st World? http://tinyurl.com/ktfwljc .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: rottndog

Hard to argue with real data as opposed to Algore hot air


24 posted on 05/13/2014 6:54:47 PM PDT by Nifster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 3boysdad; All

Actuallly, the BEST question that no one wants to ask is what ended the last mini ice age?


25 posted on 05/13/2014 6:56:26 PM PDT by Nifster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: rottndog
O2 is a trace gas. Can someone please explain to me what thermodynamic property it has that makes it such a dominant contributor to greenhouse gases. [Nope. There is any.]

CO2, as I have said often, is a trace gas. Carbon dioxide does not have the atomic structure to "trap" heat; Water vapor on the other hand traps heaps of energy in order to be water vapor. But in that trapping the temperature of the water vapor itself does not increase.

CO2 does not affect temperature; rather temperature affects CO2. I finally found the thermodynamic information regarding CO2.

Atmospheric radiation absorption and emission are dominated by the presence of all three phases of H2O. Like all molecules, CO2 only absorbs and emits specific spectral wavelengths (14.77 microns) that constitute a tiny fraction of solar radiation energy in Earth’s atmosphere. The first 50 ppm of CO2 absorbs about half of this tiny energy, each additional 50 ppm absorbs half of the remaining tiny fraction, so at the current 380 ppm there are almost no absorb-able photons left. CO2 could triple to 1,000 ppm with no additional discernible absorption–emission. This is the Beer-Lambert Law: The intensity of radiation decreases exponentially as it passes through an absorbing medium.

There are no greenhouse gases in physics. CO2 is not a pollutant; it is green plant food.


26 posted on 05/13/2014 8:04:24 PM PDT by alligator (To be ignorant of one's ignorance is the malady of the ignorant.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: rottndog
"...the warming of the Earth has been much weaker than what climate models show."
"[The IPCC report] does not bring up the large difference between observational results and model simulations"

This needs to be pointed out again and again and again. Why should we listen to the alarmists when they've already been proven wrong?


27 posted on 05/13/2014 8:43:03 PM PDT by BinaryBoy ("Immigration Reform" is ballot stuffing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson