Since the writer deigned not to provide facts but chose to use insults, allow me to make a few factual points. First, many scientists do not accept the idea of global warming, although many do. There is, in fact, a difference of viewpoints within the scientific community, each side citing scientific data.
How to decide which side is right? By counting scientist noses? Conventional thinking is that most bona fide scientists believe in global warming. To that point, the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works in 2007 issued a report that said more than “400 prominent scientists from more than two dozen countries recently voiced significant objections to major aspects of the so-called consensus on man-made global warming” and criticized the claims made by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change — and former Vice President Al Gore. That was followed by a minority report of the committee in December 2008 when the number of dissenting scientists had grown to more than 700. That figure, said the report, was “more than 13 times the number of U.N. scientists (52) who authored” a IPCC 2007 summary on global warming. So the side with the most scientists wins, right?
The IPCC report last September asserted that “human influence on the climate system is clear” and it is “extremely likely that human influence has been the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century.” To which climate scientist Dr. Richard Lindzen, emeritus professor of meteorology at MIT, responded: “I think that the latest IPCC report has truly sunk to (the) level of hilarious incoherence. They are proclaiming increased confidence in their models as the discrepancies between their models and observations decrease.
“Their excuse for the absence of warming over the past 17 years is that the heat is hiding in the deep ocean,” Lindzen told Climate Depot, a warming skeptic site. “This is simply an admission that the models fail to simulate the exchanges of heat between the surface layers and the deeper oceans. However, it is this heat transport that plays a major role in natural internal variability of climate, and the IPCC assertions that observed warming can be attributed to man depend crucially on their assertion that these models accurately simulate natural internal variability. Thus, they now, somewhat obscurely, admit their crucial assumption was totally unjustified.
“In attributing warming to man, they fail to point out that the warming has been small and totally consistent with there being nothing to be alarmed about,” he said. “It is quite amazing to see the contortions the IPCC has to go through in order to keep the international climate agenda going.”
In my book, Dr. Lindzen is scientifically literate and right on.