Climate Change Consensus? Seriously?

For those who still argue that there is ‘consensus’ among scientists that human activity, industry, and carbon emmissions cause global warming/climate change/climate disruptions (which one is it now?), and that it is reason for us to be taxed and our standard of living to be impaired even further, I present to you the following:


Warming fears are the “worst scientific scandal in the history…When people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists.” – UN IPCC Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning PhD environmental physical chemist.

“Anyone who claims that the debate is over and the conclusions are firm has a fundamentally unscientific approach to one of the most momentous issues of our time.” – Solar physicist Dr. Pal Brekke, senior advisor to the Norwegian Space Centre in Oslo. Brekke has published more than 40 peer-reviewed scientific articles on the sun and solar interaction with the Earth.

“It is a blatant lie put forth in the media that makes it seem there is only a fringe of scientists who don’t buy into anthropogenic global warming.” - U.S Government Atmospheric Scientist Stanley B. Goldenberg of the Hurricane Research Division of NOAA.

“I am convinced that the current alarm over carbon dioxide is mistaken…Fears about man-made global warming are unwarranted and are not based on good science.” – Award Winning Physicist Dr. Will Happer, Professor at the Department of Physics at Princeton University and Former Director of Energy Research at the Department of Energy, who has published over 200 scientific papers, and is a fellow of the American Physical Society, The American Association for the Advancement of Science, and the National Academy of Sciences.

“Gore prompted me to start delving into the science again and I quickly found myself solidly in the skeptic camp…Climate models can at best be useful for explaining climate changes after the fact.” – Meteorologist Hajo Smit of Holland, who reversed his belief in man-made warming to become a skeptic, is a former member of the Dutch UN IPCC committee.

“The quantity of CO2 we produce is insignificant in terms of the natural circulation between air, water and soil… I am doing a detailed assessment of the UN IPCC reports and the Summaries for Policy Makers, identifying the way in which the Summaries have distorted the science.” – South Afican Nuclear Physicist and Chemical Engineer Dr. Philip Lloyd, a UN IPCC co-coordinating lead author who has authored over 150 refereed publications.

“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.” - Geophysicist Dr. Phil Chapman, an astronautical engineer and former NASA astronaut, served as staff physicist at MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology)

“Creating an ideology pegged to carbon dioxide is a dangerous nonsense…The present alarm on climate change is an instrument of social control, a pretext for major businesses and political battle. It became an ideology, which is concerning.” - Environmental Scientist Professor Delgado Domingos of Portugal, the founder of the Numerical Weather Forecast group, has more than 150 published articles.

“But there is no falsifiable scientific basis whatever to assert this warming is caused by human-produced greenhouse gasses because current physical theory is too grossly inadequate to establish any cause at all.” – Chemist Dr. Patrick Frank, who has authored more than 50 peer-reviewed articles.

If you’ve got the time, here are another 700+ such comments from different scientists.

US Senate Minority Report -Dissent Over Man Made Global Warming Claims

I can already hear the knee-jerk alarmist’s reaction to this: “Haha, but just remember Jim Inhofe, the Republican responsible for the Minority Staff Report, receives most of his funding from oil and gas companies… he isn’t impartial to the debate.

From Jim Inhofe’s Wiki page:


In the 2008 election cycle, Inhofe’s largest campaign donors represented the oil and gas ($446,900 in donations), leadership PACs ($316,720) and electric utilities ($221,654) industries/categories.[6] In 2010, his largest donors represented the oil and gas ($429,950) and electric utilities ($206,654).[7]

But hang on, if government funding can support academic research promoting CO2 driven climate change, why can’t oil and gas companies defend their side of the case? Ultimately they and consumers will be the ones footing the cost of the bill!

The other rebuttal from the knee-jerk alarmists will be along the lines of the Center for Inquiry’s response, which claims that 80% of the scientists quoted in the minority report are not credible, because they’re “not peer-reviewed climate scientists”.

But once again, hang on, what about the other 20% or nearly 150 scientists quoted in the report who are peer-reviewed scientists?  They outnumber the number of climate ’scientists’ on the IPCC panel by three times.

And this is called ‘consensus’?

IPCC – Incestuous Panel for Counterfeit Consensus??

Comments are closed.