Climate – Natural Change for over 4 billion years!
Contrary to what climate alarmists would have you believe there are many very well qualified scientists who do NOT accept that man is responsible for the global warming which has occurred over the last 100 years and especially in the last few decades. The brave ones speak out. Many more would speak but for fear of being ostracised and accused of heresy before an inquisition reminiscent of a modern medieval age. They simply cannot risk their careers; as is well demonstrated by the treatment meted out to some of the brave “heretics” who have taken the risk. A common ploy used against those who do speak out is to claim that such scientists have received funding from the “fossil fuel industry” etc. which, even where such cases do occur, ignores the fact that government and “green industry” funding of the accepted established church view is very many times more! In any event, science should stand or fall on its own merits, ie the facts, irrespective of the source of support for the person or organisation that demonstrated them – or indeed whether they be many or few.
This page shows a few well researched lectures to demonstrate that there is very sound scientific evidence in support of natural causes for climate change, sometimes quite sudden, and most of which relate to the cycles of the sun and variations in the earth’s orbit and declination to the sun.
I originally compiled this piece to give a degree of balance for the benefit of some local students researching the subject. I hope you may find it of interest.
Almost all media promotes the idea of dangerous man-made global warming – it is somewhat of a risky business to do otherwise! In 2018 in England the BBC was criticised for giving a “platform” to views which did not conform to the so-called accepted consensus and since then contrary views have effectively been stifled.
However, as you will see, there are still a good number of scientists who do not accept the so called consensus – and are prepared to say so!
Here is a good place to start; just 5 minutes:
I would just mention a few points which are worth remembering.
Although the climate is always changing, in general colloquial use, the term “Climate Change” is frequently a euphemism for what used to be called “Man-made Global Warming” (sometimes called Anthropogenic Global Warming or AGW). In recent years, maybe because some of the scare stories have become harder to promote, instead of Global Warming the term Climate Change is now used but it is generally intended to imply Climate Change caused by man-made carbon dioxide or CO2.
Some four hundred years ago Galileo was imprisoned for heresy: he dared to question the “settled science” of the day which was that the sun revolved around the earth. Amazingly, this archaic way of thinking (ie the concept of heresy) is being replicated in the modern world regarding Climate Change where some leading scientists, who consider that climate is changing naturally, are called Sceptics or “Climate Deniers” and have even been accused of mass murder of future populations! The BBC, once lauded for its impartial reliability, today has a policy of not allowing the established view to be questioned. The leading group promoting the idea of man-made climate change is the IPCC which stands for the “Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change”. This is a UN sponsored political organisation. This business has become very political rather than scientific as it should be. So, sad to say, you should at least be aware that if you do not adhere to the popular view of the day you may be mocked or criticised by the dominant alarmist lobby. Yet the sceptical view is becoming ever more prevalent among the population at large which is increasingly doubting the politically correct establishment propaganda on a wide range of subjects.
Remember all of the forecasts for the future are based on computer models and, given the complexity of the climate, forecasting even a few years, or indeed months, into the future is well-nigh impossible. This is a major area of dispute between climate alarmists and climate sceptics. The alarmists are using models which, because of such incomplete knowledge, have many uncertainties built in whilst the sceptics seek to rely on known factual data from the past. Of course the sceptics are also very critical of the alarmists who are trying to shut down discussion by saying there is a scientific consensus and that the issue is all agreed and settled. It only requires just one scientist to demonstrate that a theory is wrong to overturn the views of a 1000 others.
So here is a selection of lectures given by some well qualified scientists who have been brave enough to speak out. Such men and women are often heavily criticised and even lose their university posts as a result. I have set out their professional CVs to show that they are indeed well qualified to speak.
Professor Bob Carter was a Fellow at the Institute of Public Affairs (IPA, Melbourne). A palaeontologist, stratigrapher, marine geologist, environmental scientist and writer with more than 40 years professional experience, and held degrees from the University of Otago (New Zealand) and the University of Cambridge (England). He has held tenured academic staff positions at the University of Otago (Dunedin) and James Cook University (Townsville), where he was Professor and Head of School of Earth Sciences between 1981 and 1999.
Bob has wide experience in management and research administration, including service as Chair of the Earth Sciences Discipline Panel of the Australian Research Council, Chair of the national Marine Science and Technologies Committee, Director of the Australian Office of the Ocean Drilling Program, and Co-Chief Scientist on ODP Leg 181 (Southwest Pacific Gateways). He was Chief Science Adviser to the International Climate Science Coalition and an Emeritus Fellow of the Institute of Public Affairs.
“Climate Context as a basis for Better Policy” The first 16 minutes of this lecture in particular clearly demonstrate that late 20th century climate change was in no way unusual when compared with the past.
Dr. John R. Christy is the distinguished Professor of Atmospheric Science and Director of the Earth System Science Center at The University of Alabama in Huntsville where he began studying global climate issues in 1987. Since November 2000 he has been Alabama’s State Climatologist. In 1989 Dr. Roy W. Spencer (then a NASA/Marshall scientist and now a Principle Research Scientist at UAH) and Christy developed a global temperature data set from microwave data observed from satellites beginning in 1979. For this achievement, the Spencer-Christy team was awarded NASA’s Medal for Exceptional Scientific Achievement in 1991. In 1996, they were selected to receive a Special Award by the American Meteorological Society “for developing a global, precise record of earth’s temperature from operational polar-orbiting satellites, fundamentally advancing our ability to monitor climate.” In January 2002 Christy was inducted as a Fellow of the American Meteorological Society.
Climate Science, Politics and Morality
Prof. Carl-Otto Weiss, Adviser to the European Institute for Climate and Energy; Former President of the National Metrology Institute of Germany, Braunschweig.
REBUILDING THE WORLD IN THE BRICS ERA International Conference of the Schiller Institute
Prof Nir Shaviv is an Israeli American physics professor, carrying out research in the fields of astrophysics and climate science. He is a professor at the Racah Institute of Physics of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, of which he is now its chairman.
Where the IPCC has Gone Wrong
Jasper Kirkby is a British experimental particle physicist currently with CERN. He originated the idea for the Tau-Charm Factory, an accelerator now under construction as BEPC II in Beijing. He has led several large particle accelerator experiments at SPEAR; the Paul Scherrer Institute; and most recently, the CLOUD experiment at CERN.
This talk presents an overview of the palaeoclimatic evidence for solar/cosmic ray forcing of the climate, and reviews the possible physical mechanisms. It is interesting in showing the complexity of the subject and how little is still understood about forecasting the future. I believe he had to be quite careful in voicing some of his views.
Judith A. Curry is an atmospheric scientist and climatologist. She holds a PhD (1982) in geophysical sciences from the University of Chicago. She has taught at the University of Wisconsin, Purdue University, Pennsylvania State University, the University of Colorado at Boulder, and Georgia Institute of Technology (Georgia Tech). In 2017, under a torrent of criticism from her colleagues and negative stories in the media, she was forced to take early retirement from her position as Professor in the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at Georgia Tech, a position she had held for 15 years (during 11 of those years, she had been Chair of the School). Curry is currently Professor Emerita at Georgia Tech, as well as President of Climate Forecast Applications Network, or CFAN, an organization she founded in 2006.
The State of the Climate Debate at the end of which (at 1hr 7 mins) she says younger scientists tell her they wish they could speak out truthfully without risking their jobs
Don J. Easterbrook is Professor Emeritus of Geology at Western Washington University. He was educated at the University of Washington, where he received a BSc, MSc and a PhD (Geology). His doctoral dissertation was entitled Pleistocene Geology of the Northern Part of the Puget Lowland, Washington. Easterbrook has studied global climate change for five decades. He was chairman of the Geology Department at Western Washington University for 12 years. He is an active environmentalist, having initiated undergraduate and graduate programs in environmental geology at Western Washington University.
This is an excellent exposition of the facts as given to a Senate hearing in the USA. Well worth watching right to the end. (this video needs to be watched using the link below)
Another lecture by Prof. Christy
Searching for Climate Change – a Temperate Look at Global Warming
Another lecture from Prof Carter in which he demonstrates that temperature has often changed in the past at a much faster rate than that experienced in the late 20th century. Watch especially the first 15 minutes of this lecture.
Here is a compilation from several interviews and lectures by various scientists
Professor Lindzen is a dynamical meteorologist with interests in the broad topics of climate, planetary waves, monsoon meteorology, planetary atmospheres, and hydrodynamic instability. His research involves studies of the role of the tropics in mid-latitude weather and global heat transport, the moisture budget and its role in global change, the origins of ice ages, seasonal effects in atmospheric transport, stratospheric waves, and the observational determination of climate sensitivity. He has made major contributions to the development of the current theory for the Hadley Circulation, which dominates the atmospheric transport of heat and momentum from the tropics to higher latitudes, and has advanced the understanding of the role of small scale gravity waves in producing the reversal of global temperature gradients at the mesopause, and provided accepted explanations for atmospheric tides and the quasi-biennial oscillation of the tropical stratosphere. He pioneered the study of how ozone photochemistry, radiative transfer, and dynamics interact with each other. He is currently studying what determines the pole-to-equator temperature difference, the nonlinear equilibration of baroclinic instability, and the contribution of such instabilities to global heat transport. He has also been developing a new approach to air-sea interaction in the tropics, and is actively involved in parameterizing the role of cumulus convection in heating and drying the atmosphere and in generating upper level cirrus clouds. He has developed models for the Earth’s climate with specific concern for the stability of the ice caps, the sensitivity to increases in CO2, the origin of the 100,000-year cycle in glaciation, and the maintenance of regional variations in climate. Prof. Lindzen is a recipient of the AMS’s Meisinger and Charney Awards, the AGU’s Macelwane Medal, and the Leo Huss Walin Prize. He is a member of the National Academy of Sciences and the Norwegian Academy of Sciences and Letters, and a fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, the American Association for the Advancement of Sciences, the American Geophysical Union, and the American Meteorological Society. He is a corresponding member of the NAS Committee on Human Rights, and has been a member of the NRC Board on Atmospheric Sciences and Climate and the Council of the AMS. He has also been a consultant to the Global Modeling and Simulation Group at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center, and a Distinguished Visiting Scientist at California Institute of Technology’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory. He earned a Ph.D. at Harvard University.
This is an interesting but much “heavier going” lecture. It also includes examples of how scientists get frightened to speak out. Watch if you have the time and interest.
Scientist Reveals Inconvenient Truth to Alarmists
By Prof Larry Bell
Dr. Christian Schlüchter’s recent discovery of 4,000-year-old chunks of wood at the leading edge of a Swiss glacier was clearly not cheered by many members of the global warming doom-and-gloom science orthodoxy.
This finding indicated that the Alps were pretty nearly glacier-free at that time, disproving accepted theories that they only began retreating after the end of the little ice age in the mid-19th century. As he concluded, the region had once been much warmer than today, with “a wild landscape and wide flowing river.”
Dr. Schlüchter’s report might have been more conveniently dismissed by the entrenched global warming establishment were it not for his distinguished reputation as a giant in the field of geology and paleoclimatology who has authored/co-authored more than 250 papers and is a professor emeritus at the University of Bern in Switzerland.
Then he made himself even more unpopular thanks to a recent interview titled “Our Society is Fundamentally Dishonest” which appeared in the Swiss publication Der Bund where he criticized the U.N.-dominated institutional climate science hierarchy for extreme tunnel vision and political contamination.
Following the ancient forest evidence discovery Schlüchter became a target of scorn. As he observes in the interview, “I wasn’t supposed to find that chunk of wood because I didn’t belong to the close-knit circle of Holocene and climate researchers. My findings thus caught many experts off guard: Now an ‘amateur’ had found something that the [more recent time-focused] Holocene and climate experts should have found.”
Other evidence exists that there is really nothing new about dramatic glacier advances and retreats. In fact the Alps were nearly glacier-free again about 2,000 years ago. Schlüchter points out that “the forest line was much higher than it is today; there were hardly any glaciers. Nowhere in the detailed travel accounts from Roman times are glaciers mentioned.”
Schlüchter criticizes his critics for focusing on a time period which is “indeed too short.” His studies and analyses of a Rhone glacier area reveal that “the rock surface had [previously] been ice-free 5,800 of the last 10,000 years.”
Such changes can occur very rapidly. His research team was stunned to find trunks of huge trees near the edge of Mont Miné Glacier which had all died in just a single year. They determined that time to be 8,200 years ago based upon oxygen isotopes in the Greenland ice which showed marked cooling.
Casting serious doubt upon alarmist U.N.-IPCC projections that the Alps will be nearly glacier-free by 2100, Schlüchter poses several challenging questions: “Why did the glaciers retreat in the middle of the 19th century, although the large CO2 increase in the atmosphere came later? Why did the Earth ‘tip’ in such a short time into a warming phase? Why did glaciers again advance in the 1880s, 1920s, and 1980s? . . . Sooner or later climate science will have to answer the question why the retreat of the glacier at the end of the Little Ice Age around 1850 was so rapid.”
Although we witness ongoing IPCC attempts to blame such developments upon evil fossil-fueled CO2 emissions, that notion fails to answer these questions. Instead, Schlüchter believes that the sun is the principal long-term driver of climate change, with tectonics and volcanoes acting as significant contributors.
Regarding IPCC integrity with strong suspicion, Schlüchter recounts a meeting in England that he was “accidentally” invited to which was led by “someone of the East Anglia Climate Centre who had come under fire in the wake of the Climategate e-mails.”
As he describes it: “The leader of the meeting spoke like some kind of Father. He was seated at a table in front of those gathered and he took messages. He commented on them either benevolently or dismissively.”
Schlüchter’s view of the proceeding took a final nosedive towards the end of the discussion. As he noted: “Lastly it was about tips on research funding proposals and where to submit them best. For me it was impressive to see how the leader of the meeting collected and selected information.”
As a number of other prominent climate scientists I know will attest, there’s one broadly recognized universal tip for those seeking government funding. All proposals with any real prospects for success should somehow link climate change with human activities rather than to natural causes. Even better, those human influences should intone dangerous consequences.
Michael Sigl1,2, Nerilie J. Abram3, Jacopo Gabrieli4, Theo M. Jenk1,2, Dimitri Osmont1,2,5,and Margit Schwikowski1,2,5
- 1Laboratory of Environmental Chemistry, Paul Scherrer Institut, 5232 Villigen, Switzerland
- 2Oeschger Centre for Climate Change Research, University of Bern, 3012 Bern, Switzerland
- 3Research School of Earth Sciences and the ARC Centre of Excellence for Climate System Science, Australian National University, Canberra 2601 ACT, Australia
- 4Institute for the Dynamics of the Environmental Sciences, National Research Council (IDPA-CNR), 30172 Venice, Italy
- 5Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of Bern, 3012 Bern, Switzerland
Received: 29 Jan 2018 – Discussion started: 20 Feb 2018 – Revised: 17 Sep 2018 – Accepted: 19 Sep 2018 –Published: 16 Oct 2018
Full paper here: https://www.the-cryosphere.net/12/3311/2018/tc-12-3311-2018.html
Below are links to some very good data and graphs:
- The evidence shows temperature controls carbon dioxide (you read that correctly). Temperatures rise first, and CO2 follows.
- Global warming is real, but it started a century (or two) before our emissions.
- The world is warmer than in 1850, but cooler than 1 000 years ago, 8 000 years ago, 130 000 years ago, and cooler than most of the history of life on Earth.
- CO2 is often called “pollution” but it feeds all plant-life on Earth.
- Big-Oil paid some skeptics, but Big-Government outspent it 3 500 to 1, and even Big-Oil spent far more on renewables than on “deniers”.
- Big Greens used to fight big corporates, but now they are big-corporates. The real grassroots movement are the skeptics who take on the lot.
- Lastly, Big Bankers want us to trade carbon. Think about that!