Chapter 2: ‘Climate Science, A Time of Transition’ The Ultimate, Animated Guide to the Climate Debate (AKA Dante’s Climate Inferno) The world certainly was a difference place after World War 2. But just how important was this time in transforming the face of climate science? Why did these changes go hand-in-hand in allowing attempts to address humanitarian concerns worldwide? And where was the spectre of CO2 looming throughout of all this? This was indeed a formative period for climate science as it got up from its hands and knees, and started to walk. But, was it walking in the right direction?..
Freeman Dyson, 91 years old and still sharp as a razor.
Ivar Griaever calls out Obama as being “dead wrong” about climate change. This speech was given by Ivar Griaever, who shares a Nobel Prize in Physics, on July 1, 2015.
William Happer, Ph.D., accepts the 2015 Frederick Seitz Memorial Award from S. Fred Singer of the Science and Environmental Policy Project (SEPP) and gives the Dinner Keynote at The Heartland Institute’s Tenth International Conference on Climate Change on June 11, 2015. To watch all presentations from this conference and others, visit ClimateConferences.Heartland.org
New American 21 December 2016
Physics Professor William Happer discredits the negative effects of CO2 on the planet and whether or not climate change is man-made. He also goes into detail of why the United Nation’s models are incorrect despite their overwhelming confidence that significant warming is taking place due to human activity.
*The views expressed by the interviewee(s) in this video do not necessarily reflect the views of The New American or any of its affiliates.*
21st CENTURY Science & Technology, Fall 2007 | by Marjorie Mazel Hecht
“Global Warming” is, and always was, a policy for genocidal reduction of the world’s population. The preposterous claim that human-produced carbon dioxide will broil the Earth, melt the ice caps, and destroy human life, came out of a 1975 conference in Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, organized by the influential anthropologist Margaret Mead, president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), in 1974.
Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics
Volume 182, January 2019, Pages 31-38
- The global warming during 1978–2018 was not more enhanced at high latitudes near the surface.
- The intrinsic properties of the lower stratospheric temperature are not related to those in the troposphere.
- The results obtained do not reveal the global warming occurrence.
A prime piece of evidence linking human activity to climate change turns out to be an artifact of poor mathematics.
by Richard Muller | October 15, 2004
Progress in science is sometimes made by great discoveries. But science also advances when we learn that something we believed to be true isnt. When solving a jigsaw puzzle, the solution can sometimes be stymied by the fact that a wrong piece has been wedged in a key place.
In the scientific and political debate over global warming, the latest wrong piece may be the hockey stick, the famous plot (shown below), published by University of Massachusetts geoscientist Michael Mann and colleagues. This plot purports to show that we are now experiencing the warmest climate in a millennium, and that the earth, after remaining cool for centuries during the medieval era, suddenly began to heat up about 100 years ago–just at the time that the burning of coal and oil led to an increase in atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide.
Zerohedge.com Feb. 3, 2017
A shocking statement was made by a United Nations official Christiana Figueres at a news conference in Brussels.
Figueres admitted that the Global Warming conspiracy set by the U.N.’s Framework Convention on Climate Change, of which she is the executive secretary, has a goal not of environmental activists is not to save the world from ecological calamity, but to destroy capitalism. She said very casually:
“This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution.”
To the attention of the Honourable Madam Angela Merkel, Chancellor of Germany
When one studies history, one learns that the development of societies is often determined by a zeitgeist, which at times had detrimental or even horrific results for humanity. History tells us time and again that political leaders often have made poor decisions because they followed the advice of advisors who were incompetent or ideologues and failed to recognise it in time. Moreover evolution also shows that natural development took a wide variety of paths with most of them leading to dead ends. No era is immune from repeating the mistakes of the past.