Dennis Avery, Townhall: In 2016, the world’s top particle physics research facility, CERN, turned the global warming debate upside down. CERN found, in the first-ever laboratory analysis of cloud chemistry, that solar variations—not CO2 molecules—were the biggest factor in the earth’s recent warmings! To be fair, climate modelers always admitted that clouds were the biggest unsolved mystery in climate change. Two events, a solar minimum and solar sun spot minimum could mean no trend increase in earth’s thermometer readings from 1998 until after 2100! That’s a century of non-warming, and neither occurrence is connected to CO2 changes.
Harold Doiron, Ph.D. Chairman, The Right Climate Stuff Research Team (Retired NASA scientists and engineers): A global warming problem does not exist at the present time. There is only a concern that burning fossil fuels may cause harmful temperatures. Potential problems require monitoring, study and contingency plan development. Equilibrium climate snsitivity is not an appropriate climate sensitivity metric for regulatory decisions. Low climate sensitivity and reasonable emissions scenarios lower the Anthropogenic Global Warming threat.
Euan Mearns, geologist: He takes a close look at the data on temperatures, carbon dioxide (CO2), and methane (CH4) found in the Vostok Ice Core of Antarctica. He focuses on the Eemian warm period between 130,000 and 115,000 years ago. This warm period was the last warm period before the current warm period, the Holocene. In her 2008 graphs showing the relationship between CO2 and temperatures from the Vostok Ice Core covering the entire record, Jo Nova stated the average lag was about 800 years, with temperatures rising (falling) about 800 years before CO2 rising (falling). This lag indicates that CO2 could not be the cause of rise or fall of temperatures.
Paul Driessen, Senior Policy Advisor for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow: This recaps testimony by four scientist witnesses at the recent House Science Committee hearings on assumptions, policy implications and scientific principles of climate change. Junk science is being used to justify demands that the United States and world eliminate the carbon-based fuels that provide 80% of the energy that makes modern industry, civilization and living standards possible – and that are needed to lift billions more people out of poverty and disease.
Greg Walcher has been deeply involved in forest management and other natural resource policy issues for decades. In this article, he assesses the current sad state of our national forests – and the policies that too often make the situation even worse – and asks a simple question: Are we willing to do anything to improve our forests and wildlife habitats, and in the process perhaps address climate change, except the one thing that might help the most? It’s a question that deserves some serious thought and robust debate.
Kate Hardiman, student at the University of Notre Dame reporting at The College Fix about scientists David Legates, U. of Delaware, Judith Curry, retired from Georgia Institute of Technology, and Richard Lindzen, Emeritus Professor of MIT and their explanations of 2016 reportedly being the "warmest year ever."
S. Fred Singer, Ph.D. in physics is an atmospheric and space physicist. He founded the Science and Environmental Policy Project (SEPP) and the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC). He served as professor of environmental sciences at the University of Virginia (1971–94). While the present report makes it clear that the scientific debate is tilting away from global warming alarmism, we are pleased to see the political debate also is not over. Global warming ‘skeptics’ in the policy arena include Vaclav Klaus, president of the Czech Republic; Helmut Schmidt, former German chancellor; and Lord Nigel Lawson, former United Kingdom chancellor of the exchequer.
Judith Curry,Ph.D. Geophysical Sciences. President (co-owner) of Climate Forecast Applications Network (CFAN). Previously, Professor and Chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology: There is considerable debate over the fidelity and utility of global climate models (GCMs). GCM outputs are used by economists, regulatory agencies and policymakers, so GCMs have received considerable scrutiny from a broader community of scientists, engineers, software experts, and philosophers of science. This report attempts to describe the debate surrounding GCMs to an educated but non-technical audienc.
Dr Kelvin Kemm is the CEO of Nuclear Africa, a nuclear project management company based in Pretoria, South Africa. He is a member of the International Board of Advisors of CFACT, Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow. He also serves on the Board of Advisors for Go Nuclear, Inc. and Environmentalists for Nuclear - USA. Dr. Kemm received the prestigious Lifetime Achievers Award of the National Science and Technology Forum of South Africa. He is dedicated to bringing nuclear energy to all of Africa, to a balanced understanding of the benefits of fossil fuels and their many by-products, and having a sound scientific discussion about claims of man-made global warming from use of fossil fuels.
Bryce Johnson, Nuclear Engineer: The purpose of the article is to contribute to refuting the false alarm that has been generated worldwide about excess global warming caused by atmospheric carbon dioxide, primarily by mischaracterizing its inherently negative feedback. .. .. The global warming analog to the feedback schematic entails CO2 insertion in the atmosphere as “input,” its absorption of infrared radiation (IR) as the “process” and altered atmospheric temperature as the “output.” .. .. Both data and analysis strongly contradict the claims being made for alarming global warming caused by CO2. The magnitude and prevalence of the over-prediction errors are sufficient to impugn the objectivity of the claimants.