To the editor
As Alice said in Wonderland, "It gets curiouser and curiouser." We seem to have entered a parallel world where day is night, black is white, up is down and global warming/climate change has reemerged as a concern, after being put to rest by an overwhelming body of science based data.
The hysteria, and hysteria is exactly the right word, began when Jim Hansen appeared before Congress and presented an apocryphal picture of out of control, human caused global warming.
Melting Antarctic glacial ice and Arctic floating sea ice would cause large increases in sea levels and inundate large areas of sea coasts, extreme weather events would increase, and sea life, including coral reefs would die. Dr. Hansen is a physicist, not a climatologist, and is the director of the Goddard Space Science Institute, which is appropriate, since its mission was to support the space program
Published data, which are available, showed that he had altered data from the network of temperature recording stations across the United States to support his contention. The data were ignored and the race was on to collect large amounts of grant monies, sadly by university professors, to generate data which supported Hansen's claims. Strong words? Yes, but supported by facts to be presented later.
Data from NASA satellites, which measure the temperature of every square foot of the earth, from ground level up to 12,000 feet, 32,000 times a day, with an accuracy of plus or minus 0.01 degrees centigrade, show that there was a modest increase in global temperatures as a result of the recovery from the mini-ice age in the 1800s. That trend reversed about 14 years ago, and the earth is now cooling.
Ice core sampling by Russia show that the Earth goes through regular cycles of warming, cooling to the point of protracted ice ages, and rewarming. This data confirms that the Earth is cooling, and many glacial geologists predict that we are heading into an ice age, pray that they are wrong. It took only 150 years for half of Michigan's lower peninsula to be covered with glaciers after the onset of the last ice age.
Why the sudden resurgence of concerns? Quite simply, those with a vested interest, both political and financial, in capitalizing on the subject, were provided with a hook to hang their collective hats on. Naomi Oreskes, a historian with no training in climatology, published a survey in which she claimed to have reviewed the abstracts of all peer reviewed publications containing the key word "climate change." She reported that 75 percent of the papers agreed with the consensus view and that only 3 percent specifically disagreed with the cause of climate change.
She misquoted her own references and exaggerated the scope of her work.
Dr. Benny Pieser conducted a similar search. He found 12,000 papers, compared to the 928 reported by Ms. Orestes. Only 1 percent agreed with the consensus position claimed by Ms. Orestes and that 75 percent explicitly disagreed. Climatologist Dr. John Christy said it best, "The original report was an opinion piece and not a scientific report. It was bogus and of no value."
That, good folks, is the source of the widespread claim that 97 percent of the world's climatologists agree that we are in a period of human caused climate change which will have catastrophic results without heroic measures.
The facts are simple and incontrovertible.
Global temperatures are now falling, after a modest increase in a recovery from the mini-ice age in the 1800s.
Human activity has no effect on global temperatures.
Much of the data supporting climate change was deliberately falsified by those riding the gravy train of government grants.
I would be more than happy to provide the supporting data for those admittedly provocative statements to anyone who is interested in the facts. My email address is: firstname.lastname@example.org. Please, serious requests only.