Climate Scientists Fight Back Against Spam Wall St. Journal Climate Denial Op-Ed

Climate scientists didn’t take the usual climate denying propaganda lying down when they responded to an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal,‘No Need to Panic About Global Warming,’ signed by 16 "scientists."

The opinion piece argues that the passion about addressing climate change is just a way for governments to raise taxes and for green non-profits to raise funding. 

39 climate scientists wrote their own op-ed, which the Wall St. Journal published – ‘Check With Climate Scientists for Views on Climate.’

Here are some excerpts from both:

No Need to Panic About Global Warming 

The oft-repeated claim that nearly all scientists demand that something dramatic be done to stop global warming is not true. In fact, a large and growing number of distinguished scientists and engineers do not agree that drastic actions on global warming are needed.

The lack of warming for more than a decade-indeed, the smaller-than-predicted warming over the 22 years since the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) began issuing projections – suggests that computer models have greatly exaggerated how much warming additional CO2 can cause.

The fact is that CO2 is not a pollutant. Plants do so much better with more CO2 that greenhouse operators often increase concentrations to get better growth.

Although the number of publicly dissenting scientists is growing, many furtively say they are afraid to speak up for fear of not being promoted – or worse.

Alarmism over climate is of great benefit to many, providing government funding for academic research and a reason for government bureaucracies to grow. Alarmism also offers an excuse for governments to raise taxes, taxpayer-funded
subsidies for businesses that understand how to work the political system, and a lure for big donations to charitable foundations promising to save the planet.

Check With Climate Scientists for Views on Climate

Do you consult your dentist about your heart condition? In science, as in any area, reputations are based on knowledge and expertise in a field and on published, peer-reviewed work. If you need surgery, you want a highly experienced expert in the field who has done a large number of the proposed operations.

You published "No Need to Panic About Global Warming" by
the climate-science equivalent of dentists practicing cardiology. Most of these authors have no expertise in
climate science. Those few authors who have such expertise are known to have extreme views that are out of step with nearly every other climate expert.

This happens in nearly every field of science. For example, there is a retrovirus expert who does not accept that HIV causes AIDS. And it is instructive to recall that a few scientists continued to state that smoking did not cause cancer, long after that was settled science.

Climate experts know that the long-term warming trend has not abated in the past decade. In fact, it was the warmest decade on record. Observations show unequivocally that our planet is getting hotter.

And computer models have recently shown that during periods when there is a smaller increase of surface temperatures, warming is occurring elsewhere in the climate system, typically in
the deep ocean.

The National Academy of Sciences of the U.S. (set up by President Abraham Lincoln to advise on scientific issues), as well as major national academies of science around the world and every other authoritative body of scientists active in climate research have stated that the science is clear:

The world is heating up and humans are primarily responsible. Impacts are already apparent and will increase. Reducing future impacts will require significant reductions in emissions of heat-trapping gases.

Research shows that more than 97% of scientists actively publishing in the field agree that climate change is real and human caused. It would be an act of recklessness for any political leader to disregard the weight of evidence and ignore the enormous risks that climate change clearly poses.

In addition, there is very clear evidence that investing in the transition to a low-carbon economy will not only allow the world to avoid the worst risks of climate change, but could also drive decades of economic growth. Just what the doctor ordered.

(Visited 13,373 times, 4 visits today)

Comments on “Climate Scientists Fight Back Against Spam Wall St. Journal Climate Denial Op-Ed”

  1. eat that

    wait losers that think oil is not the corses 98% of the co2,, plz dont jump boats and say global warming wont matter in 150 years when most of the oil has been drilled n used
    other things that u lamewads say never happend over the last 70 years
    U.S. oil peak 1970
    world oil peaking 2006…. peak means in the last 5 years the oil comeing from the ground has not gorn up at all but our need has and will continu to do so unles we change how we use the fuels n gasses. toy helliecoppters are now battery powerd now, u can still get the way cooler fuel ones but if we do not find 3 soudi arabia’s there will be an oil shortigee in the 2030s all this means is oil will no longer be for every one… scientestsus senter on there behalf in 1956 adressing the U.S. gov warning them about the us oil peak and when it would happen, it did happen in the same year he warned.
    in this petro chem world where it is used on every aspect of modern day life

    Reply
  2. Blow me

    if we dont allow the world to avoid the worst risk of climate change … what is the worst risk
    i say its ending up like our sister planet venus and us traped here desten to die with the rest of our tree of life

    Reply

Post Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *