MIT Scientist Says Carbon Dioxide irrelevant in Climate Debate

// added August 28, 2009 // 20 comments //
Image...
hcice

more from News:

http://www.examiner.com/x-7715-Portland-Civil-Rights-Examiner~y2009m8...

In a study sure to ruffle the feathers of the Global Warming cabal, Professor Richard Lindzen of MIT has published a paper which proves that IPCC models are overstating by 6 times, the relevance of CO2 in Earth’s Atmosphere. Dr. Lindzen has found that heat is radiated out in to space at a far higher rate than any modeling system to date can account for.

Link to PDF of published paper: http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/originals/co2_report_jul...

Professor Richard Lindzen of MIT’s peer reviewed work states “we now know that the effect of CO2 on temperature is small, we know why it is small, and we know that it is having very little effect on the climate.”

The global surface temperature record, which we update and publish
every month, has shown no statistically-significant “global warming”
for almost 15 years. Statistically-significant global cooling has now
persisted for very nearly eight years. Even a strong el Nino – expected
in the coming months – will be unlikely to reverse the cooling trend.

More significantly, the ARGO bathythermographs deployed
throughout the world’s oceans since 2003 show that the top 400
fathoms of the oceans, where it is agreed between all parties that at
least 80% of all heat caused by manmade “global warming” must
accumulate, have been cooling over the past six years. That now prolonged
ocean cooling is fatal to the “official” theory that “global
warming” will happen on anything other than a minute scale.

- SPPI Monthly CO2 Report: July 2009

If for no other reason than this: the IPCC assumes that the concentration of CO2 in 2100 will be 836 ppmv (parts per million volume). However, current graphs based on real data show that CO2 concentrations will only be 570 ppmv in 2100, cutting the IPCC’s estimates in half right there.
  1. groups:
    News,   Green,   Max and Jason: Still Up,   Politics,   1 more
  2. tags:
    Science,  Climate Change,  Global Warming,  Carbon Dioxide,  2 more

20 comments // MIT Scientist Says Carbon Dioxide irrelevant in Climate Debate

  • BullDogg
    • 0
      BullDogg  

    • I think this guy is telling the truth, however, perhaps the oceans are cooling because there is more ice breaking off from the warmer than normal poles and circulating ice cubes all over the globe keeping the oceans cool. His findings about the oceans may be true, but the oceans only cover 75% of the earth. There is still the other 25% of the planet that we live on to measure in order to get accurate scientific conclusions.

    • 5 months ago
  • ras_menelik
  • ras_menelik
  • JanforGore
  • nursediesel
    • 0
      nursediesel  

    • Hey, can't we just collect the methane and light it? It burns up and is gone. Light a match next time you drop a Dukie in the porcelain throne. Poof! Gas gone!

    • 5 months ago
  • Cacaoatl
  • Mike_Johnston
    • 0
      Mike_Johnston  
    • nursediesel:

      Actually the methane, in frozen form mixed with water (methane hydrate) would make a great fuel and burning it would be much better than letting it escape into the atmosphere via melting permafrost or warming oceans. However, to date no viable means of collecting it in the amounts necessary has been devised.

      As far as burning it goes, it is theorized that as the melting goes on significant quantities could be released from seafloor deposits all at once. These huge "bubbles" could cause significant local flooding when the reach the surface pushing water out of the way of rising bubbles.

      Then, once the bubbles enter the air they will hang low and spread over nearby landmasses because methane saturated with water is heavier than air. If such methane clouds encounter a spark from lightning or an electrical device the result would be a firestorm.

      So many interesting possibilities for the future :-)

    • 5 months ago
  • nursediesel
    • 0
      nursediesel  
    • nursediesel:

      Now there's a good place to start. Encourage geologists, oceanographers, what ever scientists to work together to find an effective collection system for is it (methane)> It's coming out of the earth on 'it's' own volition(?) so why not utilize it?

    • 5 months ago
  • JanforGore
    • 0
      JanforGore  
    • nursediesel:

      Actually, much of the methane is now coming up not of its own volition, but because permafrost is being melted by rising CO2 and temperatures of which methane only exacerbates the problem. Why people deny basic scientific principles all for the sake of their politics, religion, or whatever reason is beyond me. The melting permafrost and the methane it is releasing could actually push us towards that tipping point... and way before any of these ides gets a chance to be instituted. Again, we aren't talking about decades worth of time here.

    • 5 months ago
  • jh64487
  • stopnoise
  • thecoyote23
    • 0
      thecoyote23  

    • Yeah, and 6.5 billion people burning crap for several hundred years will not factor into the worlds climate at all will it? Even not counting co2, I wonder how much heat is released from car engines alone. Its absurd to think that humanity can reshape the earth at such a scale and not have any changes in global systems.

    • 5 months ago
  • chuygarsia2
  • nursediesel
  • good_stuff
    • 0
      good_stuff  

    • Why are we wasting all this money to find out if global warming does or doesn't exist? Why don't we just invent a time machine to find out once and for all, so at least we gain something regardless fo the answer?

    • 6 months ago
  • SoundBigfoot
    • 0
      SoundBigfoot  
    • Image...

    • Even the military is on board with global warming. This one guy from MIT says otherwise. The IPCC is supported by hundreds of Scientist who have reviewed and agree with their work.

      It seems unfathomable to me that people could think that we are not directly linked with the Earth and that our actions effect everything around us.

    • 6 months ago
  • JanforGore
    • 0
      JanforGore  

    • Richard Lindzen was paid by oil companies to testify in front of Congress. Look up Leipzig Declaration to see how far these shills will go to lie. If this is all climate deniers have is to keep pumping out the same old names, then it is obvious they don't have much.
      Edit:

      Here, I'll make it easier:

      http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Leipzig_Declaration_on_Global_Climate...

      "The Leipzig Declaration emerged from a November 1995 conference, "The Greenhouse Controversy," cosponsored by S. Fred Singer's Science and Environmental Policy Project and the European Academy for Environmental Affairs in Leipzig, Germany. It has been widely cited by conservative voices in the "sound science" movement and is regarded in some circles as the gold standard of scientific expertise on the issue. It has been cited by Singer himself in editorial columns appearing in hundreds of conservative websites and major publications, including the Wall Street Journal, Miami Herald, Detroit News, Chicago Tribune, Cleveland Plain Dealer, Memphis Commercial-Appeal, Seattle Times, and Orange County Register. Jeff Jacoby, a columnist with the Boston Globe, describes the signers of the Leipzig Declaration as "prominent scholars." The Heritage Foundation calls them "noted scientists," as do conservative think tanks such as Citizens for a Sound Economy, the Heartland Institute, and the Institute of Public Affairs in Australia. Both the Leipzig Declaration and Frederick Seitz's Oregon Petition have been quoted as authoritative sources during deliberations in the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives.

      When journalist David Olinger of the St. Petersburg Times investigated the Leipzig Declaration, however, he discovered that most of its signers have not dealt with climate issues at all and none of them is an acknowledged leading expert. Twenty-five of the signers were TV weathermen - a profession that requires no in-depth knowledge of climate research. Some did not even have a college degree, such as Dick Groeber of Dick's Weather Service in Springfield, Ohio. Did Groeber regard himself as a scientist? "I sort of consider myself so," he said when asked. "I had two or three years of college training in the scientific area, and 30 or 40 years of self-study." Other signers included a dentist, a medical laboratory researcher, a civil engineer, and an amateur meteorologist. Some were not even found to reside at the addresses they had given. [2]

      A journalist with the Danish Broadcasting Company attempted to contact the declaration's 33 European signers and found that four of them could not be located, 12 denied ever having signed, and some had not even heard of the Leipzig Declaration. Those who did admit signing included a medical doctor, a nuclear scientist, and an expert on flying insects. After discounting the signers whose credentials were inflated, irrelevant, false, or unverifiable, it turned out that only 20 of the names on the list had any scientific connection with the study of climate change, and some of those names were known to have obtained grants from the oil and fuel industry, including the German coal industry and the government of Kuwait (a major oil exporter).[1]"
      end

      Richard Lindzen was one of the signers of this. I think that says it all about his credibility.

    • 6 months ago
  • ampersand
  • Valentin0o
  • JanforGore
    • 0
      JanforGore  
    • JanforGore:

      They cannnot deny it because it is true, and frankly, I'm sick of this getting play to distract from the real urgency of this crisis. Real people are already feeling the effects of climate change and the facts are there to scientifically support that CO2 and temperature are intertwined and that our forcings upon the Earth in its use are exacerbating these effects.This argument has been settled long ago, and right now we need to be working on solutions to this crisis for the survival of mankind and other species, and all these OIL SHILLS can think of is how best to serve their damned profit sheets. It is amazing to me how they are so ignorant for claiming to be from "MIT", but then when money determines which side of an issue you come down on, I suppose logic and reason fly out the window.

    • 5 months ago

Add your comment

most popular
videos on current tv

current videos