Will we see this info in the mainstream media?

Question

Here is the latest peer reviewed info on manmade global warming.

http://science-sepp.blogspot.com/2007/12/press-release-dec-10-2007.html

Note the intellectual dishonesty! Whine about whose name is on the report, but submit nothing about the 3 universities who compiled the data.

Answer 1

Well let's see, your link is to a website of a group run by Fred Singer, who is a known global warming denier (doesn't even deserve to be called a 'skeptic') and just happens to be one of the authors on this paper.

The paper claims that the pattern of temperature changes is indicative of natural changes, such as solar variability, but scientists have already ruled out the Sun as having caused the current warming due to direct observations.

Here is a graph of Total Solar Irradiance (TSI) as measured by satellites (taken together called ACRIM and PMOD):

http://tamino.files.wordpress.com/2007/07/acrim1.jpg
http://tamino.files.wordpress.com/2007/07/pmod1.jpg

Here are the trends of those graphs:

http://tamino.files.wordpress.com/2007/07/pmodacr.jpg

And here is what the global temperature has been doing over that same time period:

http://tamino.files.wordpress.com/2007/08/t1975.jpg

Does that look like the Sun is responsible? It's not.

"The ACRIM data shows a slight increase in TSI - the PMOD data shows practically no trend at all. Regardless of which dataset you use, the trend is so slight, solar variations can only have contributed a [small] fraction of the current global warming."

http://www.skepticalscience.com/acrim-pmod-sun-getting-hotter.htm

'No Sun link' to climate change

Article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6290228.stm
Scientific paper: http://www.pubs.royalsoc.ac.uk/media/proceedings_a/rspa20071880.pdf

More importantly, the Singer paper is based on satellite temperature measurements of the troposphere, which are very tricky because the satellites are looking down through the entire atmosphere and have to determine how much of a cross-section is from just the troposphere. Christy in particular, who is another author on this paper, has had a very difficult time of this. At one point he claimed the troposphere was cooling (and was interviewed saying so in 'The Great Global Warming Swindle'), then later had to correct himself. Why should we think he's got it right now when his conclusions are contrary to the scientific consensus?

I'd like to see the paper (can't seem to access it right now), but this press release is extremely unconvincing.

Answer 2

Maybe, or maybe not. Depends on whether there's anything to it, or just more nonsense from Singer and Christy.

There's at least one statement in the cite you gave that's completely wrong.

The statement is "CO2 is not a pollutant".

The term "pollutant" is not a technical one, it's a legal one. It means something that is regulated under environmental laws. The Supreme Court has legally determined that CO2 IS a pollutant. Since this is a legal matter, they win.

These guys have been trying to make this case for years. And their statements have been widely reported in the media. Google "Fred Singer", he's not exactly hiding in a closet.

But they have no good data to support their views and so, they have no "traction" in the scientific community.

Scientists disagree about everything all the time. Rarely is a disagreement as lopsided as this one. EVERY major scientific organization supports mainstream global warming theory.

"The fact that the community overwhelmingly supports the consensus is evidenced by picking up any copy of Journal of Climate or similar, any scientific program at the meetings, or simply going to talk to scientists. I challenge you, if you think there is some un-reported division, show me the hundreds of abstracts that support your view - you won't be able to. You can argue whether the consensus is correct, or what it really implies, but you can't credibly argue it doesn't exist."

NASA's Gavin Schmidt

Answer 3

It needs to be reviewed first. According to the link, the journal did not come out until December, 2007. It takes time for scientists to go over the person's data and see if they come to the same conclusions.

Of course, the media loves to jump the gun on stuff like this. However, it is not politically correct these days to claim global warming may not be true. It seems that the data is still coming in on it though.

Answer 4

YES, THE main stream media will carry this at the 'top of the news'! Yeahhh, like i am an astronaut, from the Pacific Oceans smallest inhibited Island.

Answer 5

Fred Singer again???

That is really weak. We constantly hear from the skeptics that more and more scientists are against the idea of man made warming when in fact there is only a minor group of them.

Moreover this is a statement without any basis he is presenting.
Where is the report?
Where are the facts?
Where are the measurements?

No wonder the mainstream media won't publish it.

Answer 6

Change your name and move to a different state. If the leftist find out you posted an item not part of their agenda, you to will be labeled a nazi and baby killer. Run away!

Answer 7

N O, This is a natural climate change, not caused by man, animal or fish!! The sun is getting warmer.

Answer 8

Thanks for the link I have favourited it, the occasional article like this makes it into the odd newspaper. There are loads and loads of articles like this written by real scientists not looking for government grants on http://www.iceagenow.com

Answer 9

Of course not. Bad news sells and the media is about the money and not the truth.