Dedicated to the balanced discussion of global warming
E-Wire – June 1, 2007
I was originally sent this as a press release. Since I currently don’t make a habit of putting press releases on my site, I will reference the release on another site and, as typical, give what I think are the highlights. I would be interested in hearing from you on your thoughts of me including press releases in their totality. I would tag them as a separate category. Either leave a comment here or drop me a note at soshaughnessey AT Yahoo DOT com.
This is a fairly big event in the scientific community. It is fairly common to find statements from scientific skeptics saying that there are more skeptics out there but they are afraid of upsetting the establishment. The establishment they most frequently mention is the government.
It is good that scientists are stating their true beliefs, regardless of those beliefs. This is the only way that we can have true dialog on this subject. I feel that both sides have very convincing arguments and they have their share of people that are simply “over the top”. I was recently quoted on WSJ.com saying that it is better to talk than to not talk. I was referring to politicians but I would prefer if the scientists would talk and this might get it done.
“NASA’s top administrator, Michael Griffin, speaking on NPR radio made some refreshingly sensible comments about the present global warming scare,” said Robert Ferguson, Director of the Science and Public Policy Institute. “Many rationalist scientists agree with him, clearly demonstrating there is no scientific consensus on man-made, catastrophic global warming,” said Ferguson.
Griffin said he doubted global warming is “a problem we must wrestle with,” and that it is arrogant to believe that today’s climate is the best we could have and that “we need to take steps to make sure that it doesn’t change.”
Said Dr. Walter Starck, an Australian marine scientist, “Griffin makes an important distinction between the scientific findings of climate change and dramatic predictions of catastrophic consequences accompanied by policy demands. The former can be evaluated by its evidence, but; the latter rest only on assertions and claims to authority. Alternate predictions of benefits from projected changes have been proposed with comparable authority and plausibility.
Professor Robert Carter, observed, “My main reaction to Michael Griffin is to congratulate him on his clear-sightedness, not to mention his courage in speaking out on such a controversial topic.”
William Kininmonth, a former head of the Australian National Climate Centre. “Not only is it speculative to claim that humans can in any way influence the course of climate but it is arrogant to suggest that today’s climate is getting worse than it has been in the past.
Frost Fairs were common on many rivers of Europe and the London diarist John Evelyn records that in 1683-84 the Thames River froze from late December to early February. Conditions were terrible with men and cattle perishing and the seas locked with ice such that no vessels could stir out or come in. The fowls, fish and exotic plants and greens were universally perishing. Food and fuel were exceptionally dear and coal smoke hung so thickly that one could scarcely see across the street and one could scarcely breathe.
Ross McKitrick, an economist at the University of Guelph, “Claims of major, impending catastrophe are speculative and go far beyond what has been credibly established by researchers to date. Hence Griffin’s view is not at all controversial or out of step with available evidence, and he should be commended for having the courage to say it. The fact that it took courage, however, points to the deeper problem that questioning the catastrophic propaganda we hear so much is now considered politically incorrect.”
It is ironic that today President Bush appears to have given in to Hansen’s hysteria rather than to the calm reason of NASA Administrator Griffin.
Harvard University physicist Lubos Motl praised Griffin’s climate comments, calling them “sensible.” On his public blog, Motl said he applauds Michael Griffin and encourages him to act as “a self-confident boss of a highly prestigious institution.” “I have always believed that the people who actually work with hard sciences and technology simply shouldn’t buy a cheap and soft pseudoscientific propaganda such as the ‘fight against climate change,'”
Did you know that you can have these articles emailed to you? Click on the “Subscribe to email” link in the upper right corner, fill out the details, and you are set. No one will see your email address and you won’t get more spam by doing this.Australia, catastrophe, coal, consensus, corn, EPA, Europe, fish, food, Hansen, NASA, plants, Politics, prediction, science, scientists, skeptic