Da 16 videnskabsfolk i slutningen af januar advarede imod at tro på teorierne om global opvarmning, opstod der diskussion. Nu skriver de 16 videnskabsfolk endnu et læserbrev. Omtalte Kevin Trenberth var den skurk, der skrev:
“The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t.”
Concerned Scientists Reply on Global Warming
The authors of the Jan. 27 Wall Street Journal op-ed, ‘No Need to Panic about Global Warming,’ respond to their critics.
February 21, 2012
Editor’s Note: The authors of the following letter, listed below, are also the signatories of “No Need to Panic About Global Warming,” an op-ed that appeared in the Journal on January 27. This letter responds to criticisms of the op-ed made by Kevin Trenberth and 37 others in a letter published Feb. 1, and by Robert Byer of the American Physical Society in a letter published Feb. 6.
The interest generated by our Wall Street Journal op-ed of Jan. 27, “No Need to Panic about Global Warming,” is gratifying but so extensive that we will limit our response to the letter to the editor the Journal published on Feb. 1, 2012 by Kevin Trenberth and 37 other signatories, and to the Feb. 6 letter by Robert Byer, President of the American Physical Society. (We, of course, thank the writers of supportive letters.)
We agree with Mr. Trenberth et al. that expertise is important in medical care, as it is in any matter of importance to humans or our environment. Consider then that by eliminating fossil fuels, the recipient of medical care (all of us) is being asked to submit to what amounts to an economic heart transplant. According to most patient bills of rights, the patient has a strong say in the treatment decision. Natural questions from the patient are whether a heart transplant is really needed, and how successful the diagnostic team has been in the past.
Mere HER i The Wall Street Journal. Det først læserbrev er dette:
Og om endnu en skurk:
‘Fakegate’ – the new nadir of the climate change swindle
By Melanie Phillips on 22nd February 2012
You thought ‘Climategate’, the data manipulation/shady practices scandal at the high temple of anthropogenic global warming theory, East Anglia’s Climatic Research Centre, marked the nadir of the whole AGW swindle? Think again.
A new scandal has erupted involving an apparent sting directed at the Heartland Institute, the centre for AGW sceptics, which has exploded in the warmists’ faces – and it is by no means over yet.
This convoluted whodunnit – dubbed ‘Fakegate’ and charted in detail on the invaluable Watts Up With That? site – started when warmist stooges in the media started smearing AGW sceptics based on an apparent leak of incriminating documents from Heartland. It quickly became apparent that someone had used false pretences to obtain confidential Heartland electronic records, which were posted onto the web along with a purported strategic plan by Heartland to ‘muddy public understanding about climate science and policy’. But this strategic plan was in fact a fabricated document, the suspicion of which arose almost immediately.
Mere HER eller her i The Daily Mail. Phillips har her i februar skrevet flere gange klima og svindel – ligeledes i The Daily Mail:
- A chance for David Cameron to end the climate change madness
- The compelling case against Ed Davey
- Peter Gleicks tilståelse kan ses her i The Huffington Post.
Den yderste vestrefløj som vi kender den:
FakeGate: Just Another Day at Team Green
By Chris Horner on February 22, 2012
As I follow FakeGate’s trajectory, on its way to being another instructive crash-n-burn for the global warming industry’s zealots, I see a pretense in certain quarters that Peter Gleick — who I suspect is preparing another shoe for dropping, involving the provenance of the fake memo he touted as real — was operating somehow outside of what is deemed acceptable for his movement. Which is facially absurd upon even a moment’s scrutiny of those other quarters, in which he is being lionized.
But I also was reminded of my own experience with the reality that Greenpeace long made a practice of taking peoples’ trash, on a regular (in my case, and the case of then-White House aide Phil Cooney, weekly) basis.
Mere HER i The American Spectator.
Delingpole om samme sag:
Peter Gleick – the Johann Hari of climate ‘science’
By James Delingpole – February 21st, 2012
So now we know the identity of the Fakegate fake. His name is Peter Gleick, he has a PhD from Berkeley, he’s the winner of a MacArthur genius award, he’s a member of the National Academy of Sciences, and he runs a Californian research organisation called the Pacific Institute which advises, inter alia, on “integrity” in science. (H/T Roddy Campbell, Jabba The Cat)
Funny, that, eh? Before we examine a little more closely what he’s done, let’s just read a bit more about his Institute’s passionate commitment to integrity, shall we?
Mere HER i The Telegraph.
Den næste artikel kan høre som mp3 her:
Germany’s Sunshine Daydream
Bjørn Lomborg – 2012-02-16
One of the world’s biggest green-energy public-policy experiments is coming to a bitter end in Germany, with important lessons for policymakers elsewhere.
Germany once prided itself on being the “photovoltaic world champion”, doling out generous subsidies – totaling more than $130 billion, according to research from Germany’s Ruhr University – to citizens to invest in solar energy. But now the German government is vowing to cut the subsidies sooner than planned, and to phase out support over the next five years. What went wrong?
Mere HER hos Project Syndicate.
The Global Warming Cult and the Death of Science
by Daniel Greenfield on Feb 20th, 2012
At the end of last year, the media widely trumpeted the “recantation” by Richard Muller, a physics professor at Berkeley. Muller’s confession of faith was met with the unreserved glee of fanatics who believe that conversion equals validation of the True Faith. Now Dr. Fritz Vahrenholt, a prominent German chemistry professor and green activist, announced that he is coming out with a book breaking with the Warmist view. Naturally, this recantation wouldn’t receive nearly the same prominence, except when the inevitable stories kick in about Vahrenholt being a tool of the oil companies.
Mere HER i FrontPageMagazine. Daniel Greenfield har endnu et fremragende angreb på venstrefløjen på Sultan Knish:
Andre kilder: Family Security Matters, The American Thinker, The American Spectator, The American Spectator, PJ Media, PJ Media, The Telegraph, Ars Technica, The Christian Science Monitor, The Guardian, The Atlantic, Time Magazine, Time Magazine, NPR, Conservative Book Club, Forbes, IOL, Michelle Malkin,
Seneste kommentarer