List of scientists opposing global warming consensus

The title is misleading but then it is the title given by the Wikipedia. Whether there is a consensus is something of a question. Whether the consensus is right is another. Then there is the issue of why various alleged scientists take their positions. A lot of it has to do with research grants given or withheld. Various Wiki writers are attacking the mere publication of this article. Presumably they like to suppress free speech unless they agree with the content.

The scientists include:-

Believe global warming is not occurring or has ceased

Timothy F. Ball, former Professor of Geography, University of Winnipeg:
Robert M. Carter, geologist, researcher at the Marine Geophysical Laboratory at James Cook University in Australia:
Vincent R. Gray, coal chemist, founder of the New Zealand Climate Science Coalition:

Believe accuracy of IPCC climate projections is questionable

Hendrik Tennekes, retired Director of Research, Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute:
Antonino Zichichi, emeritus professor of nuclear physics at the University of Bologna and president of the World Federation of Scientists :

Believe global warming is primarily caused by natural processes

Believe cause of global warming is unknown

Believe global warming will not be significantly negative

 

Bob Carter was quoted thus:-
QUOTE
Now that mounting evidence is finally turning
public opinion against the hypothesis of man-made
'global warming', exposing it for the fraud that
it is, it is time to begin criminal investigations
into those who have actively promoted the 'crisis'
and profited from their efforts to do so.

The 'global-warming' situation is no different to
the ENRON scandal or Bernie Madoff's fraud -
except it is truly global in scale.

The contempt typically shown towards anyone who
would dare question the validity of the warming
hypothesis, let alone demand an impartial
assessment of research and data 'proving' man is
responsible for most of the warming supposedly
observed over the past century (notwithstanding
that  temperature data from urban areas is corrupt
due to the 'urban heat island effect', is simply
unacceptable.

Research that does not support the hypothesis is
supposed to be considered also -  not simply
ignored for the sake of convenience.

Such communist tactics serve only to suppress the
facts by muzzling or silencing dissenters who
refuse and who will not conform to the
predetermined 'plan' that has been decided.

Science is supposed to investigate all potential
possibilities and outcomes based on a rational
analysis of the data available.  It is not
supposed to be corrupted and politicized to the
extent that it becomes nothing more then a farce.

"It is a remarkable fact that despite the
worldwide expenditure of perhaps US$50 billion
since 1990, and the efforts of tens of thousands
of scientists worldwide, no human climate signal
has yet been detected that is distinct from
natural variation."

Bob Carter, Research Professor of Geology, James
Cook University, Townsville
UNQUOTE
That is very much to the point. The source might or might not be good.

 

Errors & omissions, broken links, cock ups, over-emphasis, malice [ real or imaginary ] or whatever; if you find any I am open to comment.
 
Email me at Mike Emery. All financial contributions are cheerfully accepted. If you want to keep it private, use my PGP KeyHome Page

Updated on 23/06/2018 21:29