Monday, July 09, 2007

The Consensus on Climate Change/Global Warming


For what is probably the most definitive list of quotes supporting the IPCC please go here. If you know of any others I need to add please post.

16 comments:

Michael Tobis said...

Andrew Dessler points me to the recent unanimous statement of Texas A&M University's renowned meteorology/oceanography faculty here.

Sparrow said...

Tobis,

Welcome to my blog and thanks for the hat tip. I'll add it to the list A.S.A.P. Lists like this are of great value as it lists the scientists *by name*. Libertarians generally have a strong distrust of large organizations. A petition signed by 100 individual scientists would mean a lot more to a libertarian than 1 governmental organization representing 300 scientists.

paleo engineer said...

I beleive that it is best to seek out facts and to distinguish these from the 'other stuff'.

I am seeking definitive information on the following:

Why we are not now entering a new ice age period - or are we?

Anonymous said...

Very worthwhile. As an editing tip you might like to lose the "(sic)" after the word "recognise" - there may be other examples like this in your list too - because your anticipated reader probably ought to know enough to expect (UK) English spelling from a UK society.

Best wishes!

Anonymous said...

Some other institutions you may want to add to the consensus list;

ExxonMobil's response to the 4th IPCC

"Since the Third Assessment Report in 2001 the number of relevant studies has increased substantially. There is increasing evidence that changes in the earth's climate over the last century have had a discernible influence on many physical and biological systems. Results from climate models and scenarios of future society indicate that future climate change could have wide-ranging affects on water availability, ecosystems, food production, coastal zones and society. These studies assume that no actions are taken to mitigate or adapt to future changes.

Because the risks to society and ecosystems could prove to be significant, ExxonMobil believes that it is prudent now to develop and implement global strategies that address the risks, keeping in mind the central importance of energy to the economies of the world. This includes putting policies in place that start us on a path to reduce emissions, while understanding the context of managing carbon emissions among other important world priorities, such as economic development, poverty eradication and public health."

http://www.exxonmobil.com/Corporate/
news_statements_20070406_climateipcc2.aspx

And similar (Europe) - this seems to be the definitive statement on climate change.

http://www.exxonmobileurope.com/
Europe-English/Citizen/Eu_VP_climate.asp


Australian Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO)

"The IPCC confirmed that human activity has increased concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, including carbon dioxide – in 2007 at its highest level for 650 000 years.

The presence of such high concentrations of greenhouse gases is altering the Earth’s climate, raising temperatures and impacting on the landscape."

http://www.csiro.au/science/ps38v.html

(I cut the links in half and put the latter half on the next line because it seemed in preview the longish ones would be cut off)

Excellent resource for this strand of the debate. Please keep it updated.

Barry.

John Mashey said...

Great resource.

here's a couple more:
Chevron:
http://www.willyoujoinus.com/issues/environment/?s=section3
(points at various places, and they do seem to actually mean it.)

Shell Oil: (more):
Lord Ron Oxburgh was Chairman for a while:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_20050126/ai_n9693285
Shell boss warns of global warming `disaster'

George Bush!! (Well, George H. W. Bush), in 1989:
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=17765

Anonymous said...

Great resource for helping to convince the uneducated. The AGU has updated it's position and made it stronger and you need to update your link to this statement.

Amateur6 said...

Question regarding this sentence: "If only 2% of the 20,000 climatologists were bought out then we'd have 400 deniers (skeptics are convinced by science not money)" -- I'm missing context. Are there ANY deniers who qualify as climatologists?

Mark said...

From another site, comments to follow:
So, Dave, why is it that the U.S. has been denying the existence of any such warming cycle for the last several years against the judgment of the majority of the planet, bet it will take that long again for our “experts” to admit links to hydrocarbons. The “idiots” you refer to of that opinion include several global commissions and most significantly the consensus of Nobel winners meeting at Lindau for the 59th Meeting of Nobel Laureates. http://www.lindau-nobel.d then go to /PressReleaseOpeningPhysics2008.AxCMS

Among the varied other “idiots” to be included are providers of signatures on the Kyoto treaty, as well as many other award winning scientists/scholars around the world.

The only large online consensus of scientists against the hydrocarbon/global warming link I was able to find were A) within the U.S. and B) funded by private industry both of which are obvious conflicts of interest as measured against the huge PetroChemical interests here, they represent vast $ and corporate legal protections, virtually unlimited resources. And these “scientists” are not putting their reputations on the line since they’re not award merit scholars.

Show me large groups of Nobel winners willing to sign on with the U.S. petroleum industry in denial of CO/CO2 links to global warming, then we’ll talk.

Thanks Tony, also http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2008/06/nasas-leading-c.html, further disinformation against reputable authorities.

Mark said...

And another more recent discussion:
Let the corporate politicos try to explain away the ozone layer peeling away at the poles and as a direct effect of that the level of ultraviolet radiation is high enough to have to wear sunblock year round……that wasn’t the case until the last 20-25 years and is directly tied to CFC (chlorofluorocarbon) propellants. So let’s all pretend that hydrocarbon residuals like CO & CO2 have nothing to do with environmental change, just pay attention to and trust the swill the petrochemical manufacturers are putting out to the corporate media, no conflict of interest there, yeah right. Just like they said manufacturing and driving gas guzzling pieces of fecal matter that are unmarketable outside of the U.S. would be good for the economy, gluttonous a$$holes.

Anonymous said...

All You Wanted To Know About Fast Cash Advance Loan application. Well after you have spend your cash remember to repay the guaranteed payday. The process of receiving cash. Are performed at branch according to America39s Cash. Ace cash advances are a great solution for immediate cash. [url=http://viiumft.rahuketu.net/map.html]cash advance in pensacola florida[/url] And with over 400 branches across Canada all open late it39s easy to see why.

Anonymous said...

Not bad article, but I really miss that you didn't express your opinion, but ok you just have different approach

Anonymous said...

I didn't understand the concluding part of your article, could you please explain it more?

Anonymous said...

i genuinely adore your writing type, very interesting,
don't quit and keep creating mainly because it just good worth to read it,
looking forward to look over more of your current content, stunning day ;)

Anonymous said...

hedeshoda
[url=http://healthplusrx.com/improve-eyesight-naturally]improve eyesight naturally[/url]
phydrassy

Bruce A. Kershaw said...

$25,000 Reward

for the proof Humans cause climate change or global warming.

Please go to http;//co2u.info

Thank You

Bruce A. Kershaw