New Jason satellite indicates 23-year global cooling
The Sun, not CO², controls the earth's temperatures
by Dennis T. Avery
http://www.enterstageright.com/archive/articles/0508/0508globalcooling.htm
5 May 2008

The new Jason oceanographic satellite shows that 2007 was a "cool" La Nina year, but Jason also says something more important is at work: The much larger and more persistent Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) has turned into its cool phase, telling us to expect moderately lower global temperatures until 2030 or so.
 

The PDO seems to be driven by the huge Aleutian Low in the Arctic, but we don't know what controls the Aleutian Low.

Nonetheless, 22.5-year "double sunspot cycles" have been identified in South African rainfall, Indian monsoons, Australian droughts, and rains in the United States' far southwest as well. These cycles argue that the sun, not CO², controls the earth's temperatures.

All of this defies the "consensus" that human-emitted carbon dioxide has been responsible for our global warming. The evidence for man-made warming has never been as strong as its Green advocates maintained. The earth's warming from 1915 to 1940 was just about as strong as the "scary" 1975 to 1998 warming in both scope and duration, and occurred too early to be blamed on human-emitted CO².

The cooling from 1940 to 1975 defied the Greenhouse Theory, occurring during the first big surge of man-made greenhouse emissions. Most recently, the climate has stubbornly refused to warm since 1998, even though human CO² emissions have continued to rise strongly.

Jason is run by NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory and a French team.

How many years of declining world temperature would it take now, in the wake of the ten-year non-warming since 1998, to break up Al Gore's "climate change consensus"?

Meteorologist Takes Down Newsweek science writer for Shoddy Climate Reporting
by Craig James

Chief Meteorologist
a Michigan NBC TV affiliate

http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=38D98C0A-802A-23AD-48AC-D9F7FACB61A7

Excerpt: In the May 5, 2008 edition of Newsweek, there is an article by science writer Sharon Begley trying to convince us that “global warming isn’t good for crops after all”.

Her first example is that a glacier in the Himalayas called the Gangotri glacier. She writes that over the last 25 years the glacier has shrunk about half a mile, “a rate three times the historical norm”. The implication is, of course, that this was caused by increasing atmospheric CO2 produced by human activities.

Since this glacier supplies 70% of the flow to India’s Ganges River during the dry season, loss of the glacier would cause great harm to India’s crop irrigation.

However, this article in the Times of India, contains the following quote: According to Geological Survey of India data, between 1935 and 1996, Gangotri glacier receded at an average 18.80 meters per year. Studies by other institutions show that yearly recession dropped to 17.5 meters during 1971-2004 and further to 12.10 meters in 2004-05.

The river flow may be falling and the glacier retreating, but is it really three times the historical norm?

The Indian government calls it a “natural phenomena” that may have been exacerbated by the building of four dams.

[…] Her next example is that of a diminishing snowpack in the United States, particularly in the Pacific Northwest. Was she out of the country this winter?

 

[However,] snow depth comparisons from the Northwest Weather and Avalanche Center in Seattle, Washington [show] that this year’s snow pack in the Northwest was between 133% and 330% above normal. In many locations in the central Rockies, the Midwest and northern New England, the highest snowfall amounts of any year were recorded.

Of course, one year does not make a trend, but since the Pacific Decadal Oscillation has gone negative, this may indeed be the beginning of a trend. See too Why Let The Facts Get in The Way of a Good Story?

***

The average temperature in April 2008 was 51.0 F. This was -1.0 F cooler than the 1901-2000 (20th century) average, the 29th coolest April in 114 years. The temperature trend for the period of record (1895 to present) is 0.1 degrees Fahrenheit per decade.

Can’t get much more official than this: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/cag3/na.html


 

NASA Says Climate Shifting to Cooler Temperatures
by Phillip Brennan
http://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/NASA_Climate_cooling/2008/05/01/92541.html
1 May 2008

The allegedly warming earth is in for about 30 years of cooling according to NASA, one of the leading global warming theory advocates.

NASA has confirmed that a developing natural climate pattern will likely result in much colder temperatures, according to Marc Shepherd, writing in the April 30 American Thinker.

He adds that NASA was also quick to point out that such natural phenomena should not confuse the issue of manmade greenhouse gas induced global warming which apparently will be going on behind the scenes while our teeth are chattering from a decade and a half long cold spell.

A cool-water anomaly known as La Niña occupied the tropical Pacific Ocean throughout 2007 and early 2008. In April 2008, scientists at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory announced that while the La Niña was weakening, the Pacific decadal Oscillation – a larger-scale, Slower-cycling ocean pattern – had shifted to its cool phase.

Notes Shepherd,

"This shift in the PDO, which could last for 20 or 30 years, can have significant implications for global climate."

Warns meteorologist Anthony Watts:

"Look out California agriculture. The wine industry, fruits and nut growers will be hit with a shorter growing season and more threats of frost, among other things."

Watts warns that California's agriculture, which experienced "unprecedented growth" during the past warm phase, may now be in serious trouble as things cool down.

Notes Shepherd:

"Recently lower global temps, likely caused by the late start of Solar Cycle 24, already have some greenhouse gassers nervous - particularly amid speculation of a possible impending 'little ice age.'

"But surely," he says, "a 30 year protracted naturally-explainable cooling period concurrent with rising atmospheric CO² levels would forever cool the public's receptiveness to global warming alarmism. No problem – our ever panicking friends at NASA have that angle covered, too."

“Says NASA:

"Natural, large-scale climate patterns like the PDO and El Niño-La Niña are superimposed on global warming caused by increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases and landscape changes like deforestation.

 

According to Josh Willis, JPL oceanographer and climate scientist,

‘These natural climate phenomena can sometimes hide global warming caused by human activities. Or they can have the opposite effect of accentuating it.'"

In other words, CO² is secretly warming the planet. Or not.

(Considering how strongly NASA’s James Hansen has been pushing global warming,, this is a major admission. I wonder how long it will take for NASA to admit that we could even possibly, maybe, conceivably, be headed into an ice age)

 

Geophysicist - Sorry to ruin the fun, but an ice age cometh

by Phil Chapman

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23583376-7583,00.html
23 Apr 2008

Excerpt: The first sunspot appeared in January this year and lasted only two days.

A tiny spot appeared last Monday but vanished within 24 hours. Another little spot appeared this Monday. Pray that there will be many more, and soon.

The reason this matters is that there is a close correlation between variations in the sunspot cycle and Earth's climate. The previous time a cycle was delayed like this was in the Dalton Minimum, an especially cold period that lasted several decades from 1790. Northern winters became ferocious: in particular, the rout of Napoleon's Grand Army during the retreat from Moscow in 1812 was at least partly due to the lack of sunspots.

That the rapid temperature decline in 2007 coincided with the failure of cycle No.24 to begin on schedule is not proof of a causal connection but it is cause for concern. It is time to put aside the global warming dogma, at least to begin contingency planning about what to do if we are moving into another little ice age, similar to the one that lasted from 1100 to 1850.

There is no doubt that the next little ice age would be much worse than the previous one and much more harmful than anything warming may do. There are many more people now and we have become dependent on a few temperate agricultural areas, especially in the US and Canada.

Global warming would increase agricultural output, but global cooling will decrease it. Millions will starve if we do nothing to prepare for it (such as planning changes in agriculture to compensate), and millions more will die from cold-related diseases.

[…]All those urging action to curb global warming need to take off the blinkers and give some thought to what we should do if we are facing global cooling instead. It will be difficult for people to face the truth when their reputations, careers, government grants or hopes for social change depend on global warming, but the fate of civilization may be at stake.

(Phil Chapman is a geophysicist and astronautical engineer who lives in San Francisco. He was the first Australian to become a NASA astronaut. I don't think his two offered solutions -use nuclear weapons to release methane, or dirt on the ice to decrease the albedo affect- would do anything to stop the coming ice age, but I do agree that we need to consider what we could do agriculturally.)

 

The Coming of a New Ice Age
by Gerald E. Marsh

http://www.winningreen.com/site/epage/59549_621.htm

21 Feb 2008

Contrary to conventional wisdom, the real danger facing humanity is not global warming, but more likely the coming of a new Ice Age.

What we live in now is known as an interglacial, a relatively brief period between long ice ages. Unfortunately for us, most interglacial periods last only about ten thousand years, and that is how long it has been since the last Ice Age ended.

Entering a new ice age would be catastrophic for the continuation of modern civilization.

One has only to look at maps showing the extent of the great ice sheets during the last Ice Age to understand what a return to ice age conditions would mean. Much of Europe and North-America were covered by thick ice, thousands of feet thick in many areas and the world as a whole was much colder.

The last Little Ice Age started as early as the 14th century when the Baltic Sea froze over followed by unseasonable cold, storms, and a rise in the level of the Caspian Sea. That was followed by the extinction of the Norse settlements in Greenland and the loss of grain cultivation in Iceland. Harvests were even severely reduced in Scandinavia And this was a mere foreshadowing of the miseries to come.

By the mid-17th century, glaciers in the Swiss Alps advanced, wiping out farms and entire villages. In England, the River Thames froze during the winter, and in 1780, New York Harbor froze. Luckily, the decrease in solar activity that caused the Little Ice Age ended and the result was the continued flowering of modern civilization.

Five hundred million years ago, carbon dioxide concentrations were over 13 times current levels; and not until about 20 million years ago did carbon dioxide levels drop to a little less than twice what they are today.

It is possible that moderately increased carbon dioxide concentrations could extend the current interglacial period. But we have not reached the level required yet, nor do we know the optimum level to reach.

So, rather than call for arbitrary limits on carbon dioxide emissions, perhaps the best thing the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the climatology community in general could do is spend their efforts on determining the optimal range of carbon dioxide needed to extend the current interglacial period indefinitely.

NASA has predicted that the solar cycle peaking in 2022 could be one of the weakest in centuries and should cause a very significant cooling of Earth’s climate. Will this be the trigger that initiates a new Ice Age?

We ought to carefully consider this possibility before we wipe out our current prosperity by spending trillions of dollars to combat a perceived global warming threat that may well prove to be only a will-o-the-wisp.

Scientists call on UN Climate leaders to renounce Global Warming claims and 'devastating policies'

http://www.ilovemycarbondioxide.com/letters/IPCC_letter_14April08.pdf
14 April 2008

The UN's Climate Committee leadership and policies were today challenged by four scientists, including one Nobel Peace Prize winner, from around the world to admit that CO² does not drive the climate, and to renounce the theory and associated 'devastating policies' which are weakening the world economy and increasing food shortages and destruction of forest across the planet.

Graph by Joseph D’Aleo,

Certified Consultant Meteorologist, Fellow of the American Meteorological Society (AMS),

and Executive Director Icecap.us

Their bombshell letter includes a graph by Joseph D’Aleo, (Certified Consultant Meteorologist, Fellow of the American Meteorological Society (AMS), and Executive Director Icecap.us) based entirely on official figures which shows that while CO² has risen dramatically for the last ten years world temperatures have been falling contrary to the UN (IPCC) predictions

The writers directly challenge the IPCC to produce observational evidence for the UN's CO² driven Global Warming theories which are now being used to justify anti-CO² measures and taxes all over the world:

"If you believe there is evidence of the CO² driver theory in the available data please present a graph of it" the scientists challenge.

Temperatures have been declining in a zig zag fashion for 3,000 years
interview of Dr. Arthur Robinson

by William F. Jasper
18 Feb 2008

http://thenewamerican.com/node/7009#SlideFrame_1

Excerpts from a great interview of Dr. Arthur Robinson by William F. Jasper for The New American:

The New American: "Al Gore also says that the UN’s IPCC has spoken, and the debate is over, because there is a consensus. What do you say to that?"

Dr. Robinson: "Right now the UN claims that they have about 2,500 people involved in this and about 600 scientists seriously involved. This is what Al Gore would point to today.

"We have more than 22,000 scientist signers of our global-warming petition who’ve looked at the issue and concluded essentially the opposite of these United Nations people."

TNA: "Allowing the UN to take over the world’s energy would have a big effect on our higher standard of living, would it not?"

Dr. Robinson: "The power to tax and ration energy is the power to control the world — to have life and death control over every human being on the planet. No government should ever have this power. The United Nations-IPCC process is not about the climate or saving the environment. It is about power and money — lots of it.

"If the misuse and falsification of the scientific method that drives the human-caused global-warming mania succeeds, it will cause the greatest acts of human genocide the world has ever known. It must be stopped."

Dr. Arthur Robinson is a professor of chemistry and is cofounder of the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, which was created in 1980 to conduct basic and applied research in subjects applicable to increasing the quality, quantity, and length of human life. As part of his work, he edits the newsletter Access to Energy.


 

Scientists worried about new ice age
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY
7 Feb 2008

http://ibdeditorial.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=287279412587175

Scientists worried about a new ice age seek funding to better observe something bigger than your SUV — the sun.

Kenneth Tapping, a solar researcher and project director for Canada's National Research Council, is among those looking at the sun for evidence of an increase in sunspot activity.

Solar activity fluctuates in an 11-year cycle. But so far in this cycle, the sun has been disturbingly quiet. The lack of increased activity could signal the beginning of what is known as a Maunder Minimum, an event which occurs every couple of centuries and can last as long as a century.

Such an event occurred in the 17th century. The observation of sunspots showed extraordinarily low levels of magnetism on the sun, with little or no 11-year cycle.

This solar hibernation corresponded with a period of bitter cold that began around 1650 and lasted, with intermittent spikes of warming, until 1715. Frigid winters and cold summers led to massive crop failures, famine and death in Northern Europe.

Tapping reports no change in the sun's magnetic field so far this cycle and warns that if the sun remains quiet for another year or two, it may indicate a repeat of that period of drastic cooling of the Earth, bringing massive snowfall and severe weather to the Northern Hemisphere.

As we have noted many times, perhaps the biggest impact on the Earth's climate over time has been the sun.

R. Timothy Patterson, professor of geology and director of the Ottawa-Carleton Geoscience Center of Canada's Carleton University, says,

"I and the first-class scientists I work with are consistently finding excellent correlations between the regular fluctuations of the sun and earthly climate. This is not surprising. The sun and the stars are the ultimate source of energy on this planet."

Patterson, sharing Tapping's concern, says:

"Solar scientists predict that, by 2020, the sun will be starting into its weakest Schwabe cycle of the past two centuries, likely leading to unusually cool conditions on Earth."

"If we were to have even a medium-sized solar minimum, we could be looking at a lot more bad effects than 'global warming' would have had," Patterson says.

But if the sun shuts down, we've got a problem. It is the sun, not the Earth, that's hanging in the balance.

You owe it to yourself to read the entire article in Investors Business Daily under the title "The Sun Also Sets"


 

Russian Scientist says Earth could soon face new Ice Age

http://en.rian.ru/science/20080122/97519953.html
22 Jan 2008

Temperatures on Earth have stabilized in the past decade, and the planet should brace itself for a new Ice Age rather than global warming, a Russian scientist said in an interview with RIA Novosti Tuesday.

"Russian and foreign research data confirm that global temperatures in 2007 were practically similar to those in 2006, and, in general, identical to 1998-2006 temperatures, which, basically, means that the Earth passed the peak of global warming in 1998-2005," said Khabibullo Abdusamatov, head of a space research lab at the Pulkovo observatory in St. Petersburg.

According to the scientist, the concentration of carbon dioxide in the Earth's atmosphere has risen more than 4% in the past decade, but global warming has practically stopped.

It confirms the theory of "solar" impact on changes in the Earth's climate, because the amount of solar energy reaching the planet drastically decreased during the same period, the scientist said.

Had global temperatures directly responded to concentrations of "greenhouse" gases in the atmosphere, they would have risen by at least 0.1 Celsius in the past ten years, however, it never happened, he said.

"By the mid-21st century the planet will face another Little Ice Age, similar to the Maunder Minimum, because the amount of solar radiation hitting the Earth has been constantly decreasing since the 1990s and will reach its minimum approximately in 2041," he said.

The Maunder Minimum occurred between 1645 and 1715, when only about 50 spots appeared on the Sun, as opposed to the typical 40,000-50,000 spots.

It coincided with the middle and coldest part of the so called Little Ice Age, during which Europe and North America were subjected to bitterly cold winters.

"However, the thermal inertia of the world's oceans and seas will delay a 'deep cooling' of the planet, and the new Ice Age will begin sometime during 2055-2060, probably lasting for several decades," Abdusamatov said.

Therefore, the Earth must brace itself for a growing ice cap, rather than rising waters in global oceans caused by ice melting.

Mankind will face serious economic, social, and demographic consequences of the coming Ice Age because it will directly affect more than 80% of the earth's population, the scientist concluded.

More Than 400 Prominent Scientists Disputed Man-Made Global Warming Claims in 2007
Senate Report Debunks "Consensus"
http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=f80a6386-802a-23ad-40c8-3c63dc2d02cb

20 Dec 2007

More than 400 prominent scientists from more than two dozen countries recently voiced significant objections to major aspects of the so-called "consensus" on man-made global warming.

These scientists, many of whom are current and former participants in the UN IPCC criticized the climate claims made by the UN IPCC and former Vice President Al Gore.

Even some in the establishment media now appear to be taking notice of the growing number of skeptical scientists. In October, Washington Post Staff Writer Juliet Eilperin conceded the obvious, writing that climate skeptics,

"appear to be expanding rather than shrinking."

Many scientists from around the world have dubbed 2007 as the year man-made global warming fears "bite the dust."

In addition, many scientists who are also progressive environmentalists believe climate fear promotion has "co-opted" the green movement.

This blockbuster Senate report lists the scientists by name, country of residence, and academic/institutional affiliation. It also features their own words, biographies, and weblinks to their peer reviewed studies and original source materials as gathered from public statements, various news outlets, and websites in 2007.

This new "consensus busters" report is poised to redefine the debate.

Many of the scientists featured in this report consistently stated that numerous colleagues shared their views, but they will not speak out publicly for fear of retribution.

Atmospheric scientist Dr. Nathan Paldor, Professor of Dynamical Meteorology and Physical Oceanography at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, author of almost 70 peer-reviewed studies, explains how many of his fellow scientists have been intimidated.

"Many of my colleagues with whom I spoke share these views and report on their inability to publish their skepticism in the scientific or public media," Paldor wrote.

Scientists from Around the World Dissent

This new report details how teams of international scientists are dissenting from the UN IPCC’s view of climate science.

In such nations as Germany, Brazil, the Netherlands, Russia, New Zealand and France, nations, scientists banded together in 2007 to oppose climate alarmism. In addition, over 100 prominent international scientists sent an open letter in December 2007 to the UN stating attempts to control climate were "futile."

Paleoclimatologist Dr. Tim Patterson, professor in the department of Earth Sciences at Carleton University in Ottawa, recently converted from a believer in man-made climate change to a skeptic.

Patterson noted that the notion of a "consensus" of scientists aligned with the UN IPCC or former Vice President Al Gore is false.

"I was at the Geological Society of America meeting in Philadelphia in the fall and I would say that people with my opinion were probably in the majority."

The distinguished scientists featured in this new report are experts in diverse fields, including: climatology; oceanography; geology; biology; glaciology; biogeography; meteorology; oceanography; economics; chemistry; mathematics; environmental sciences; engineering; physics and paleoclimatology.

Some of those profiled have won Nobel Prizes for their outstanding contribution to their field of expertise and many shared a portion of the UN IPCC Nobel Peace Prize with Vice President Gore.

Additionally, these scientists hail from prestigious institutions worldwide, including:

• Harvard University

• NASA

• National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR)

• Massachusetts Institute of Technology

• the UN IPCC; the Danish National Space Center

• U.S. Department of Energy

• Princeton University

• the Environmental Protection Agency

• University of Pennsylvania

• Hebrew University of Jerusalem

• the International Arctic Research Centre

• the Pasteur Institute in Paris

• the Belgian Weather Institute

• Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute

• the University of Helsinki

• the National Academy of Sciences of the U.S., France, and Russia

• the University of Pretoria

• University of Notre Dame

• Stockholm University

• University of Melbourne

• University of Columbia

• the World Federation of Scientists

• the University of London

The voices of many of these hundreds of scientists serve as a direct challenge to the often media-hyped "consensus" that the debate is "settled."

The report counters the claims made by the promoters of man-made global warming fears that the number of skeptical scientists is dwindling.

Year of Global Cooling
by David Deming
19 Dec 2007

http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071219/COMMENTARY/10575140/-1/RSS_COMMENTARY 

Since the mid-19th century, the mean global temperature has increased by 0.7 degrees Celsius. This slight warming is not unusual, and lies well within the range of natural variation. Carbon dioxide continues to build in the atmosphere, but the mean planetary temperature hasn't increased significantly for nearly nine years. Antarctica is getting colder.

South America this year experienced one of its coldest winters in decades. In Buenos Aires, snow fell for the first time since 1918. In Peru, 200 people died from the cold and thousands more became infected with respiratory diseases.

Crops failed, livestock perished, and the Peruvian government declared a state of emergency.

Icebergs float in a bay off Ammassalik Island, Greenland, in this July 19, 2007 file picture.

September reports from scientists documented that a record amount of Greenland's ice sheet

melted this past summer — 3 billion tons more than the previous high mark.

Unexpected bitter cold swept the entire Southern Hemisphere in 2007. Johannesburg, South Africa, had the first significant snowfall in 26 years.

Australia experienced the coldest June ever. In northeastern Australia, the city of Townsville underwent the longest period of continuously cold weather since 1941. In New Zealand, the weather turned so cold that vineyards were endangered.

Last January, $1.42 billion worth of California produce was lost to a devastating five-day freeze. In April, a killing freeze destroyed 95 percent of South Carolina's peach crop, and 90 percent of North Carolina's apple harvest. At Charlotte, N.C., a record low of 21F on April 8 was the coldest ever recorded for April, breaking a record set in 1923. On June 8, Denver recorded a new low of 31F. Denver's temperature records extend back to 1872.

On Dec. 7, St. Cloud, Minn., set a new record low of minus 15F. On the same date, record low temperatures were also recorded in Pennsylvania and Ohio.

Extreme cold weather is occurring worldwide. On Dec. 4, in Seoul, Korea, the temperature was a record minus 5C. Nov. 24, in Meacham, Ore., the minimum temperature was 12 degrees Fahrenheit colder than the previous record low set in 1952.

The Canadian government warns that this winter is likely to be the coldest in 15 years.

Oklahoma, Kansas and Missouri are just emerging from a destructive ice storm that left at least 36 people dead and a million without electric power. People worldwide are being reminded of what used to be common sense: Cold temperatures are inimical to human welfare and warm weather is beneficial. Fossil fuels don't seem so awful when you're in the cold and dark.

In 2005, a Canadian Greenpeace representative explained "global warming can mean colder, it can mean drier, it can mean wetter." In other words, all weather variations are evidence for global warming. I can't make this stuff up.

David Deming is a geophysicist, an adjunct scholar with the National Center for Policy Analysis, and associate professor of Arts and Sciences at the University of Oklahoma.





Attempting to Stop Global Warming is Futile and a Mistake, says letter to the UN

by Brett Anderson
http://global-warming.accuweather.com/2007/12/attempting_to_stop_global_warm_1.html
15 Dec 2007

Global warming is a natural phenomenon that has affected humanity through the ages and it is not possible to stop climate change.

The Bali and the IPCC process is a mistake, and will ultimately be futile. These are the conclusions from an open letter to the United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon, which was signed by more than 100 specialists from around the world with expertise ranging from climate science to economics and biology.

The letter, assembled by Robert M. Carter, professor at the Marime Geophysical Laboratory of James Cook University in Australia, argues against the existence of consensus and rejects claims of abnormal climate change.

The letter also disputes the IPCC process and claims new research has emerged making the IPCC reports "materially oudated".

The IPCC's Summaries for Policy Makers are the most commonly read IPCC reports among politicians and non-scientists, yet, according to the letter, these summaries are prepared by a small core writing team with final drafts approved by government representatives.

A great majority of IPCC contributers, reviewers and other qualified scientists are not involved in the preparation of the documents.

The letter, posted on the National Post from Canada, also states that the IPCC's conclusions are quite inadequate as justification for implementing policies that will markedly diminish future prosperity.

Also, it is not established that it is possible to significantly alter global climate through cuts in human greenhouse gas emissions.
 

Back to Contents