global warming science: dissenting views


Richard Moore


There are many questions involved in this global warming debate:

         1) Is global warming occurring?
         2) How significant are greenhouse gases to warming?
         3) How significant is CO2 within greenhouse gases?
         4) How significant are the human-caused pollutants?
         5) Which of these pollutants are the most significant?
         6) How disastrous is global warming likely to be?
         7) Is scientific reporting being distorted by an orthodoxy?

         8) What is the effect of media coverage re/global warming?
         9) What kinds of 'responses to the crisis' can we expect from 
Western leaders?
         10) What are the likely consequences of those responses?
         11) Who is likely to benefit from the orthodoxy and the responses?

The only question on which we seem to have universal agreement is 
(1): Yes, global warming is occurring.

In my first posting on this subject, re/the Channel 4 documentary, I 
presented a non-orthodox view. This particular documentary turned out 
to be suspect for many reasons (sorry :-( ), but it has been very 
productive in prompting you folks to do some good research, which you 
have been sending in (thanks :-)). Believe it or not, I am bandwidth 
limited, and your research contributions are very important to our 
progress here on the list. I've always considered cyberjournal to be 
a collaborative endeavor.

In the second posting, I gave air time to research and opinions that 
support the orthodox view, that man-caused CO2 is the main culprit, 
or at least the most critical amplifier of other culprits.

In this, our third posting, I'll be giving air time to opinions and 
research that dissent from the orthodox view. I'll also be including 
material about the pressure on scientists to conform to the orthodox 
view, and about censorship of dissenting research.

In the next, a fourth posting, I'll be dealing with the political 
questions (8-11). In my view these may be the most important 
questions for us to be looking at. This is where actions will or will 
not be taken, for good or for ill.

My own view is that it is wrong-headed to totally dismiss a report 
just because some part of it is wrong, or because the author's 
motives are suspect. On that basis, for example, we would need to 
dismiss all mainstream sources. History is full of cases where ideas 
which are now universally accepted were originally universally 
rejected. And the originators of those new ideas were not always 
saints, nor were they always right about everything.



To begin, here some articles I've posted to newslog, along with 
excerpts from each:

21 Mar 2007   The Nature Institute: Water, Energy, and Global Warming
         The picture becomes more interesting when a comparison is
         made between urban and rural ground-based weather stations.
         Urban stations show a significantly greater temperature
         increase. In fact, many rural stations show no change at
         all. This has led scientists to speculate about the
         existence of a so-called "heat island effect", which might
         affect our global temperature measurements. In the late
         1990s, NASA completed a study of this effect in Atlanta,
         Georgia. The study showed temperatures inside Atlanta up to
         8 degrees F higher than the surrounding countryside.
             ... the thermal effect of the water vapor is more than ten
         times that of the carbon dioxide. This difference would be
         even greater for fuels that produce a higher percentage of
         water vapor, such as methane [or hydrogen! -rkm].
         Additionally, the thermal resistance or insulating
         properties of water vapor and carbon dioxide are essentially
         identical in value. So the insulating (greenhouse) effects
         that are of concern for carbon dioxide are even more
         troubling when we consider water vapor emissions.

21 Mar 2007 Global Warming On The Ropes
         How can you continue to claim that global warming on Earth
         is primarily caused by mankind when other planets (Mars,
         Jupiter and Pluto) with no confirmed life forms and
         certainly no man-made industrial greenhouse gas emissions
         also show signs of global warming? Wouldn't it make more
         sense that the sun is responsible for warming since it is
         the common denominator?

21 Mar 2007   Global Research: Global Warming: A Convenient Lie
         An astronomical observatory in Russia declared that, "the
         Mars data is evidence that the current global warming on
         Earth is being caused by changes in the sun". They further
         point out that both Mars and Earth have, throughout their
         histories, experienced periodic ice ages as climate changes
         in a continuous fashion. NASA has also been observing
         massive storms on Saturn, which indicate a climate change
         occurring on that planet as well. NASA's Hubble Space
         Telescope has also been recording massive climate changes on
         Neptune's largest moon, Triton. Triton, whose surface was
         once made up of frozen nitrogen, is now turning into gas.

21 Mar 2007   Edward J. Wegman: critique of climatology research
         The controversy of the MBH98/99 methods lies in that the
         proxies are incorrectly centered on the mean of the period
         1902-1995, rather than on the whole time period.
             ...The MBH98/99 work has been sufficiently politicized that
         this community can hardly reassess their public positions
         without losing credibility. Overall, our committee believes
         that the MBH99 assessment that the decade of the 1990s was
         the likely the hottest decade of the millennium and that
         1998 was likely the hottest year of the millennium cannot be
         supported by their analysis.

From: "William Engdahl" <•••@••.•••>
To: <•••@••.•••>
Subject: RE: Is global warming a hoax?
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 22:23:55 +0100

Richard How refreshing to find some sanity amid this orchestrated 
Global Armageddon Climate crap.

If you don't yet know it I recommend reading an independent 
scientific critique of the IPCC methodology and report. Do a Google 
on "Ad Hoc Committee Report on the 'Hockey Stick' Global Climate 
Reconstruction" by Edward J. Wegman et al. They rip it to shreds. 
Nigel Calder who is in the ITV 4 report you sent wrote a book, The ?? 
Son where he offers the same explanation Russian science does namely 
that the minor weather changes are due not to cows and cars but to 
solar flares erupting which happens with varying periodicity 
releasing huge energy to the planet earth causing such as El Nino etc.


Hi William,

I found Wegman's report and posted it to newslog (last one above). 
It is tough reading, but seems to be very solid. When he talks about 
"incorrectly centered on the mean", he's showing that one must be 
very careful with statistics. Who is it that said, "There are lies, 
damn lies, and statistics"? Wegman shows how many of  the 
peer-reviewed papers on climate change are highly incestuous, where 
the same clique reviews each other's work, and then they are trapped 
into defending their previous papers, despite discovered distortions.


Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 08:21:01 -0700
From: marc bombois <•••@••.•••>
Subject: Re: Is global warming a hoax?
To: •••@••.•••

I watched that video and I've also seen Gore's. I was suspicious of 
Gore before seeing his film because he's an elite. The film confirmed 
my suspicions with its manipulative tugging at our emotions and 
simplistic "logic". Most interesting were the reactions of the three 
people I watched it with who were sucked in and who I constantly 
challenged to question what they were watching. They need hope, as we 
all do, and this is probably why Gore's offering is so successful.

The BBC video is manipulative too, but it offers hard facts and 
debunks Gore. There's no doubt in my mind that "climate change" is 
the elite's latest fear mongering manipulation to control our 
behaviour and make more money.

I used to work with geologists and whenever climate change was 
mentioned they to a man would simply shrug their shoulders and say 
"so what?". We will adapt.

From: "M.A. "Omas" Schaefer" <•••@••.•••>
To: <•••@••.•••>
Subject: Re: Is global warming a hoax?
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 11:53:33 -0400

Harvard came out with a study several years ago stating that we were 
coming out of a mini-ice age, so of course the temperatures would be 
rising. They also observed the influence of the sun, which had gone 
into a hyperactive period and was warming the other planets in our 
solar system as well. That report was completely buried by the 
mainstream press!

It is my understanding that the "consensus" of orthodox scientists 
from the Church of Global Warming has ignored the sun's influence all 
along, because of course, the sun represents an "Inconvenient Truth".

The UN knew it wouldn't be easy to implement a world tax, so what 
better way to support that fraternity of tyrants than to establish 
global fear of a boogey man. Then, of course, they would come in with 
their carbon tax in order to protect us from the boogey man they 

From: "Philip Snow" <•••@••.•••>
To: <•••@••.•••>
Subject: Re: global warming -- the science
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2007 17:43:21 -0000

Dear RKM,

Couldn't help larfing at your correspondent's comment:
       'To imagine the bulk of the scientific community engaged in
         a conspiracy to frighten the world for the sake of it (or
         even to ensure their research grants are renewed) simply
         beggars belief - mine at least.'

When, as I have commented many times, 'Evolutionism' is clearly 
involved in all of the above - just substitute 'brainwash' for 

Anyone who can believe that the incredible wonder of life is simply 
the 'Accidental side-effect of Random Big Bang[s] in Nothingness, 
Chance Chemical soup & trillions of Blind Genetic Mistakes' - is 
obviously barking!!

Please do air this, Richard...

Philip Snow, author/artist: "The Design & Origin of Birds", DayOne 
Books, 2006. "Light & Flight - Hebridean Wildlife & Landscape 
Sketchbook", Brown & Whittaker, Mull, 12/06.


From: "david moore" <•••@••.•••>
To: •••@••.•••, •••@••.•••
Cc: •••@••.•••
Subject: global warming -- the science -- the book
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2007 07:49:50 -1000


Michael Crichton's recent book, "STATE of FEAR", deals exactly with 
this topic.  it is well-researched and well-referenced.  in fact, the 
book is more than half a science reader, and only partly a novel. 
his well-backed conclusion agrees with the BBC documentary.

and apropos of the current discussion, the book not only deals with 
the data and research about global warming, it also deals with its 
"political correctness", and the problems faced by anyone trying to 
discuss the topic.

i'd highly recommend Crichton's book to anyone who cares about this topic.


From: "Mitchell Hall" <•••@••.•••>
To: <•••@••.•••>
Subject: Global warming intrigue
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2007 14:50:05 -0700

Hi Richard,

I first heard about The great global warming swindle from MediaLens. 
 You included a link to them in your recent response post.

So I looked up Martin Durkin (the documentary's director) in 
Wikipedia and learned he's been involved in other factually 
questionable and/or misleading documentaries. Greenpeace et al have 
taken issue with his claims.

He seems to be an anti-environmentalist, a pro-GM foods advocate, an 
avowed libertarian, etc.

The neutrality of the Wikipedia article is disputed (naturally), but 
the ties he appears to have certainly leave me skeptical of his 
motives. None of this information is conclusive, of course, but it 
does seem rather telling.

Speaking of skepticism, the reason I've stayed a subscriber to your 
list for so long is your rare combination of open-mindedness and 

That you give consideration to both sides of an extremely important 
issue (such as this one) is highly laudable.




Escaping the Matrix website
cyberjournal website     
Community Democracy Framework:
subscribe cyberjournal list        mailto:•••@••.•••
Posting archives