Open Letter to Bali: Give Up Futile Attempts to Combat Climate Change
Posted by Paul, December 14th, 2007 - under Uncategorized.
Tags: Climate & Climate Change
Climate Rationalists have assembled an open letter to the Bali climate conference. Signatories include Bob Carter and Lord Lawson of Blaby.
The letter begins:
Open Letter to the Secretary-General of the United Nations
Dec. 13, 2007
His Excellency Ban Ki-Moon
Secretary-General, United Nations
New York, N.Y.
Dear Mr. Secretary-General,
Re: UN climate conference taking the World in entirely the wrong direction
It is not possible to stop climate change, a natural phenomenon that has affected humanity through the ages. Geological, archaeological, oral and written histories all attest to the dramatic challenges posed to past societies from unanticipated changes in temperature, precipitation, winds and other climatic variables. We therefore need to equip nations to become resilient to the full range of these natural phenomena by promoting economic growth and wealth generation.
The letter is published in the Canadian National Post here. The signatories are here, and there is an editorial here.
Accomplishments of selected signatories of
the open letter to the U.N. Secretary General
The study of climate change in relation to public policy encompasses many areas of research and scholarship; most are well represented amongst the signatories to the letter to His Excellency Ban Ki-Moon.
The press release that accompanies the publication of the letter contains the following statement:
“The signatories to the letter include many distinguished professional persons who have occupied leading positions in national and international science organizations, government organizations and universities, and have been elected as fellows of distinguished scientific academies or awarded prestigious science prizes.”
In no particular order, here are some examples of the accomplishments of selected signatories to the letter
AWARDS & POSITIONS
President, World Federation of Scientists – ZICHICHI
Director of a national research funding agency (The Australian Research Council) – AITKIN
Director General of a comprehensive national research agency (The New Zealand DSIR) – KEAR
Chairman of the U.N. Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation – JAWOROWSKI
Laureate of the UNEP Global 500 environmental program – BRYSON
Director of the Australian National Secretariat for the Ocean Drilling Program – CARTER
Director of a national weather observing agency (US Satellite Weather Service) – SINGER
Director of the Australian National Climate Centre – KININMONTH
Director of Research, Royal Dutch Meteorological Service – TENNEKES
Director of the French (CNRS) Laboratory of Climatology – LEROUX
Director, Institute of Environmental Science (Carlton University) – MICHEL
Head of the Forecasting Centre, Norwegian Meteorological Institute – MOENE
University Pro-Vice-Chancellor – ENDERSBEE
State Geologist (Kansas) – GERHARD
Director of Russian Institute for Economic Analysis, Advisor to President Putin – ILLARIANOV
UK Chancellor of the Exchequer (Thatcher government) – LORD LAWSON
Dep. Secretary of the Treasury (Australia) – MOORE
President of the WMO Commission for Climatology – MAUNDER
Recipient of the Donner Prize (best book on Canadian Public Policy) – MCKITRICK
Recipient of Meisinger and Charney Awards (American Meteorological Society) – LINDZEN
Recipient of Mills Medal in Cloud Physics of the Royal Meteorological Society – AUSTIN
Recipient of Petr Beckmann Award for “courage and achievement in the defense of scientific truth” – IDSO
Recipient of Chapman Medal (Royal Astronomical Society of London) – AKASOFU
Recipient of the Max Planck Medal – DYSON
Recipient of the Percy Nicholls Award recognizing notable scientific achievement – ESSENHIGH
Editor of an environmental journal (Energy & Environment) – BOEHMER-CHRISTIANSEN
Editor of a biological journal (American Midland Naturalist) – EVANS
Editorial Board member (Climate Research) – KHANDEKAR
IPCC expert reviewers – GRAY, COURTNEY
Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science – LINDZEN
Fellow of the Royal Society of New Zealand – AUSTIN, CARTER
Fellow of the Geological Society of America – EASTERBROOK
Fellow of the American Geophysical Union – AKOSOFU
Fellow of the Royal Statistical Society – WEGMAN
Fellow of the Australian Academy of Science – PALTRIDGE
Hon. Member of the Royal Geological Society of the Netherlands – VAN LOON
ACADEMIC CREDENTIALS
Professor of Environmental Sciences – SINGER
Professor of Climatology – BALL, MALBERG, LEROUX
Professor of Meteorology – GRAY, W., BRYSON, LINDZEN
Professor of Atmospheric Science – LUPO, PALTRIDGE, ROPER
Professor of Oceanography – O’BRIEN
Professor of Quaternary Geology – KARLEN, TOM VAN LOON
Professor of Geology – VAN LOON, PLIMER, CARTER, EASTERBROOK, OLLIER, PATTERSON
Professor of Sedimentology – PRATT
Professor Marine Geology – WINTERHALTER
Professor of Isotope Geology – CLARK, PRIEM
Professor of Paleogeophysics & Geodynamics – MORNER
Professor Chemistry – KAUFFMAN, STILBS
Professor of Physics – HAYDEN, ANDRESEN, AKOSOFU, ANDRESEN, AUSTIN, DYSON, ZICHICHI
Professor of Mathematical & Theoretical Physics – GERLICH
Professor of Applied Mathematics – ESSEX
Professor of Statistics – WEGMAN
Professor of Economics – MILNE
Professor Geotechnology – KROONENBERG
Professor for Innovation and Technology Management – WILKSCH
Professor of Energy Conversion – ESSENHIGH, KOUFFELD
Professor of Engineering – MACALIK, ALEXANDER, ENDERSBEE
Professor of Public Health Engineering – KOP
Professor of Chemical Engineering – THOENES
Distinguished Emeritus Professors – 24 in total
Anthony, I believe I wrote oceans drive global temperature. Since the oceans cover seventy percent of the planet and land occupies thirty percent, then global surface temp would be governed by the simple equation:
GST = (SST x 0.7) + (LST x 0.3)
If the oceans drop 1 degree and the land rises 1 degree, global temperature drops 0.4 degrees. Which drives global temperature? The oceans.
But do the AMO and PDO drive climate? There are numerous paleoclimatological papers available online that illustrate their effects on droughts, rainfall, river flow, etc., for Asia, Africa, Australia, Europe, and the Americas. Too many to quote and they’re too easy to google.
Regarding a temperature drop of one degree twenty years from now: Of course I can’t prove we are headed for 1 degree cooling. And no one can prove that we will continue to head in the opposite direction. My greatest fear about all this warming hoopla is that it will lead us in one direction, without contingency plans for the other. Can the IPCC propose such a contingency? Doubtful. They’re too tied into AGW caused by greenhouse gases. Suppose Theodore Landscheidt was right, that we’re headed for another solar minimum by 2030, that the result is the next Little Ice Age. You can’t grow crops in snow. You can shift agriculture locale, but there are those without that option, just as there are those without that option if elevated temperatures increases desertification in some areas.
Happy Holidays
Suppose one lone nutter is right, and the collective output of the experts in the field is wrong. Do you back the long shot in the Melbourne Cup, like the rest of the mugs?
“The IPCC have already run the models with all natural influences, but no CO2, and all natural influences, with CO2. CO2 is the missing link in explaining the rising temperature.”
IPCC doesn’t run models, IPCC evaluates models.
I’ve seen models with 1 K/2xco2 behaving very well, however if you start fiddling with parametrisations (like aerosols) you can get any result. The hottest models have the poorest fit to the data. Also, any parameter that has the same time series as log(CO2) – a simple linear trend – can be substituted, from which there are many to choose. Models are not performing at the regional level, and this is where CO2-fingerprinting can be tested.
Hans Erren – “There is still a huge gap between theoretical climate sensitivity of 1 K/2xCo2 and the proclaimed “best value” of 3K/2xCO2.”
However the gap is even wider for the other suspects. Cosmic rays have not made it out of the laboratory and the Sun’s irradiance is almost constant.
In the light of this greenhouse gas driven warming is the most likely suspect. There are no rivals with equal scientific backing.
Ender
Again: you can’t use the lack of proof for other mechanisms to promote a catatrophic climate sensitivity fot CO2! The aerosols are the twiddling factor, CO2 by itself also doesn’t give sufficient warming. What’s the observational evidence for strong aerosol cooling?
BTW, are you aware of the Engelbeen Oxford experiment?
http://www.ferdinand-engelbeen.be/klimaat/oxford.html
Thanks Bob, we’ll just plan for every extreme contingency we can think of then. What do you think the chances of financing that are?
Apparently the choice we face is windfills or safe roads. I see no way out – especially since I buried my head in the sand.
SJT quotes Wendy Craik, need one say any more?
25 years, Duke Doofus, 25 years of nil response to increased CO2. Now lets take another look at that CO2 sensitivity stuff, shall we?