The Year Of Man-Made Global Warming Doubt

Scientists at the UN global warming conference currently underway in Poland this week, made one thing clear. They say that they have completed one crucial task. They have established beyond a doubt that man-made global warming is for real.

Last year, the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released a 2007 Summary for Policymakers authored by fifty two scientists which said that climate change is "unequivocal, is already happening, and is caused by human activity."

So, if the United Nations Panel on Climate Change has proven beyond any doubt that human activity creates Global Warming, why is there so much intense disagreement to that conclusion within the scientific community?

Maybe its because the planet has not seen any warming in the last ten years. It could also be due to the fact that all those dire predictions by climate computer models of warming in this decade have proven to be so incorrect. Man-made global warming doubt also may be growing because the planet has actually begun to cool.

In fact, 2008 is set to be the coolest year of this decade, according to a preliminary estimate of global average temperature from the Met Office (UK). The global average temperature for 2008 should come in close to 14.3C, which is 0.14C below the average temperature for 2001-07.

So far in 2008, there have been 250 scientists that have added their names to a list of 400 scientists that have already spoken out against the United Nations concerning man-made global warming.

This week, a newly updated U.S. Senate Minority Report will feature the dissenting voices of these 650 international scientists. Many are current and former U.N. IPCC scientists, who have now turned against the U.N. The U.S. Senate report is the latest evidence of the growing groundswell of scientific opposition rising to challenge the concept that global warming is man-made.

Here is a sample of some of the quotes from international scientists the Senate Minority Report is said to contain:

“I am a skeptic. Global warming has become a new religion.” - Nobel Prize Winner for Physics, Ivar Giaever.

“Since I am no longer affiliated with any organization nor receiving any funding, I can speak quite frankly. As a scientist I remain skeptical."- Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Joanne Simpson, the first woman in the world to receive a PhD in meteorology and formerly of NASA who has authored more than 190 studies and has been called “among the most preeminent scientists of the last 100 years.”

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.

“The IPCC has actually become a closed circuit; it doesn’t listen to others. It doesn’t have open minds. I am really amazed that the Nobel Peace Prize has been given on scientifically incorrect conclusions by people who are not geologists,” - Indian geologist Dr. Arun D. Ahluwalia at Punjab University and a board member of the UN-supported International Year of the Planet.

“The models and forecasts of the UN IPCC “are incorrect because they only are based on mathematical models and presented results at scenarios that do not include, for example, solar activity.” - Victor Manuel Velasco Herrera, a researcher at the Institute of Geophysics of the National Autonomous University of Mexico

“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.

“Even doubling or tripling the amount of carbon dioxide will virtually have little impact, as water vapour and water condensed on particles as clouds dominate the worldwide scene and always will.” Geoffrey G. Duffy, a professor in the Department of Chemical and Materials Engineering of the University of Auckland, NZ.

“For how many years must the planet cool before we begin to understand that the planet is not warming? For how many years must cooling go on?” - Geologist Dr. David Gee the chairman of the science committee of the 2008 International Geological Congress who has authored 130 plus peer reviewed papers, and is currently at Uppsala University in Sweden.

A climate debate continues to rage within the scientific community, and one thing has become very certain. In 2008, there is a growing scientific consensus behind man-made global warming doubt.

A Record Warm October Leaves NASA In The Cold

Until late last year global warming proponents pointed out that temperature records showed that 1998 was the hottest year ever recorded in the United States.

In fact, Several of the years surrounding 1998 were also very warm and near the record as well. It certainly appeared that the climate was progressively warming when reviewing the historical record.

That was before a Canadian blogger named Steve McIntyre at Climate Audit set the NASA temperature record straight. Mcintyre audited the actual records and found substantial errors. When he reported his findings to NASA scientists, they conducted a review that showed he was indeed correct.

This led NASA to revise the data published on its website. The errors changed the historical facts concerning the global warming argument. The hottest year in the United States was no longer 1998, but 1934. 2001 was no longer even listed in the Top Ten. Instead, four of the top ten hottest years were back the 1930s.

One year later, the problem of inaccurate data providing dubious global warming conclusions has embarrassed NASA once again. Last Monday, NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) announced that last month was the hottest October on record.

This NASA claim was hard to understand since in the United States, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) had already ranked October temperatures as the 70th-warmest October in the last 114 years. Once again GISS data was examined by Steve Mcintyre at "Climate Audit" and another blogger Anthony Watts from the website "Watts Up With That".

As a result of the data review, GISS was again revising information published on its website. Data analysis revealed that Russia was recorded as unusually warm. The reason for all that October warmth was that scores of temperature records from Russia and elsewhere were not actually based on October readings at all. Figures from September had simply been carried over and repeated two months running.

A GISS spokesman explained that the reason for the error in the Russian figures was that they were obtained from NOAA and that GISS did not have resources to exercise proper quality control over the data it was supplied with.

Global temperature published by GISS are one of the four data sets that the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) relies on to promote its case for global warming. The truth is that GISS consistently shows higher temperatures than any of the others.

The fact is that it was not a record warm October and the planet has been cooling for the last few years. Unfortunately, for the second straight year, NASA is embarrassed by a lack of quality control at GISS. The basis of science is making sure that the evidence is accurate before any conclusion is made.

So, a lack of quality control over data is a sad excuse. The real truth is that a record warm October was an erroneous conclusion based on inaccurate information. It has left NASA's credibility on global climate change out in the cold, for the second year in row.