Regarding climate, there is no unanimity, not even close!!!

Five scientists skeptical of the so-called "climate change"

 We are often told that the science of global warming is "settled", "settled", "without discussion". They claim that our planet is warming, humans are the main cause, and that we have to do something or the earth will very soon it will become inhabitable.  But is it really so? As it turns out, many distinguished scientists are not aboard the ship of climate alarmism. Here are 5 distinguished scientists who disagree with the ridiculousness of "established science":

1. Richard Lindzen, M.I.T.

Dr Rixhard Lindzen is Professor Emeritus of Meteorology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He acquired his Ph.D. in applied mathematics at Harvard University in 1964 and has since published about 200 books and articles.

In 2009 Dr. Lindzen stated at the International Climate Change conference, “There is no substantial basis for predicting major global warming due to the observed increase in some greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide, methane and chlorofluorocarbons. "

Later in 2016 Dr. Lindzen commented to The Daily Caller:

“This is propaganda. All scientists agree that it is now probably warmer than at the end of the Little Ice Age. Almost all scientists agree, too, that adding CO2 will give you a little more heat. Maybe a little warm-up. But it is propaganda to translate that into that it is dangerous and we have to reduce CO2 emissions. "

2. Harrison Schmitt, Ph.D.

In addition to his doctorate in geology from Harvard University, serving as a United States Senator, and being the last man to walk on the moon (as part of the Apollo 17 mission), Dr. Schmitt taught at Harvard and has served in the National Geological Agencies of North America and Norway.

In addition, he has served on the Senate Subcommittee on Science, Technology, and Space, chaired the NASA Advisory Council, was appointed to the New Mexico Governor's Cabinet in the Department of Natural Resources, and was chair of the Annapolis Center for Environmental Quality.

Dr. Schmitt outlined his concerns with climate change in 2013.

“The cessation of global warming observed over the past decade has shown how far-fetched NASA and other computer modeling predictions of supposedly man-made warming are - and that warming has little correlation with concentrations of carbon dioxide. atmospheric carbon. As many scientists have noted, variations in global temperature correlate much better with solar activity and with complicated ocean and atmospheric cycles. There is not the slightest evidence that more carbon dioxide caused more extreme weather. "

In 2016 Dr. Schmitt made similar comments in a separate article in The Wall Street Journal:

“The fear of excessive warming from more CO2 in the atmosphere, including that released by human activity, led many people to advocate for substantial and costly reductions in CO2 emissions. … The costs of emissions regulations, which will be paid for by all, will be extremely high and will provide no benefit to the majority of the world's population. ”

Will Happer, Princeton

Happer, Emeritus Professor of Physics at Princeton University, earned his Ph.D. in physics from his alma mater. He worked as a professor at Columbia University and served as Director of the Department of Energy's Office of Science under George Bush before returning to Princeton.

Earlier this year, 2017, Dr. Happer told The Guardian that he thinks “There is an entire area of ​​so-called climate science that is really more cult than science. It is like Hare Krishna or something like that. They have glassy eyes and sing. They will potentially cause great harm to all of science. "

In an interview in January 2017, Dr. Happer expressed similar doubts regarding the dangers of climate change. He predicted that global warming will be modest and actually very beneficial for the planet and people.

“The warming predicted by more CO2 is grossly overstated. The equilibrium of warming by a doubling of CO2 will not be 3ºC, which could be considered marginally a problem, but closer to 1ºC, which will be very beneficial. It should not be forgotten that 'global warming' is an average value. … So the net result of more CO2 will be highly beneficial to humanity, "

3. Neil Frank, Ph.D.

After serving in the United States Air Force as a weather officer, Dr. Frank worked for the National Hurricane Center. And after obtaining his Ph.D. in meteorology from Florida State University, he later became the director of the Centre.

 He also served as Chief Meteorologist for CBS in Houston for two decades as well as the American Meteorological Society.

In an opinion piece written for The Daily Center in 2016, in response to comments made by presidential candidate Hillary Clinton during the campaign, Dr. Frank had the following to say.

“Yes, the Earth's atmosphere is heating up. It has been, in fact, for 150 years. What causes it? CO2, natural cycles, or some combination? The sun and ocean current cycles correlate better with temperatures than CO2. If CO2 does not control the temperature of the earth, why has our government spent more than $ 150 billion dollars just on "green energy" - not to mention billions more in research to ensure belief in warming? anthropogenic- during the last 15 years? What do we have to show for it? … Future costs are staggering.

In 2010 Dr. Happer had already expressed similar concerns in an editorial for the Houston Chronicle.

“Third, and most importantly, skeptics believe that climate models are overstating the prediction of future warming from increasing concentrations of carbon dioxide. We are being told that numerical models, which cannot make accurate 5 and 10 day weather forecasts, can be simplified and run forward 100 years with results so reliable that they can impose an economic disaster on the United States and the world. whole."

4. Roy Spencer, former NASA scientist

Dr Spencer is a meteorologist at the University of Alabama-Huntsville. Prior to his college studies, he worked for NASA as a Senior Scientist for Climate Studies at the Marshall Space Flight Center. In addition, he was the developer of the satellite temperature measurement system. He received his doctorate in meteorology from the University of Wisconsin, Madison.

In 2007 Dr. Spencer publicly stated his opinion through an editorial that appeared in The New York Post:

“Contrary to popular accounts, very few scientists in the world - possibly none - have sufficient understanding of the climate system to be reliable in predicting the magnitude of global warming. To the public, we may see ourselves as experts, but the vast majority of us work on only a small portion of the problem.

Additionally, Dr. Spencer elaborated on his feelings about climate change during an interview with Rush Limbaugh:

“People who have built climate models that predict global warming think they have enough physics in those models that they can predict the future. I think they don't. I think that the climate system, the weather as it is today in the real world shows a stability that they don't have in those models. "

(#) Article by Eduardo Fereyra, taken from the site mitosyfraudes.org

 

He also served as Chief Meteorologist for CBS in Houston for two decades as well as the American Meteorological Society.

In an opinion piece written for The Daily Center in 2016, in response to comments made by presidential candidate Hillary Clinton during the campaign, Dr. Frank had the following to say.

“Yes, the Earth's atmosphere is heating up. It has been, in fact, for 150 years. What causes it? CO2, natural cycles, or some combination? The sun and ocean current cycles correlate better with temperatures than CO2. If CO2 does not control the temperature of the earth, why has our government spent more than $ 150 billion dollars just on "green energy" - not to mention billions more in research to ensure belief in warming? anthropogenic- during the last 15 years? What do we have to show for it? … Future costs are staggering.

In 2010 Dr. Happer had already expressed similar concerns in an editorial for the Houston Chronicle.

“Third, and most importantly, skeptics believe that climate models are overstating the prediction of future warming from increasing concentrations of carbon dioxide. We are being told that numerical models, which cannot make accurate 5 and 10 day weather forecasts, can be simplified and run forward 100 years with results so reliable that they can impose an economic disaster on the United States and the world. whole."

4. Roy Spencer, former NASA scientist

Dr Spencer is a meteorologist at the University of Alabama-Huntsville. Prior to his college studies, he worked for NASA as a Senior Scientist for Climate Studies at the Marshall Space Flight Center. In addition, he was the developer of the satellite temperature measurement system. He received his doctorate in meteorology from the University of Wisconsin, Madison.

In 2007 Dr. Spencer publicly stated his opinion through an editorial that appeared in The New York Post:

“Contrary to popular accounts, very few scientists in the world - possibly none - have sufficient understanding of the climate system to be reliable in predicting the magnitude of global warming. To the public, we may see ourselves as experts, but the vast majority of us work on only a small portion of the problem.

Additionally, Dr. Spencer elaborated on his feelings about climate change during an interview with Rush Limbaugh:

“People who have built climate models that predict global warming think they have enough physics in those models that they can predict the future. I think they don't. I think that the climate system, the weather as it is today in the real world shows a stability that they don't have in those models. "

(#) Article by Eduardo Fereyra, taken from the site mitosyfraudes.org