More than 1,600 scientists, including two Nobel laureates, declare climate "emergency" a myth

submitted by P-38lightning from (justthenews.com)

all 7 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]MagicMike 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Climate change, like organized religion, is one of the largest hoaxes ever perpetrated on humanity.

[–]cunninglingus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

In all of those countries the best they could locate are 1600 corporate shills, many of which are retired (see here: https://clintel.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/WCD-version-081423.pdf ), and many who might work for oil companies, and perhaps a few made-up names, along with far right simps. There are 1600 Shell Oil employees who could have been approached and many others in the US. But whomever these "people" are supposed to be, these few signatures don't change the science.

[–]Macrode2D 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Good job.

[–]weavilsatemyface 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

There are just three climatologists in that list.

Some of the expert scientists on the list include:

  • Edward Abbott MD, Retired obstetrician
  • Mitchell R. Childress, Archaeologist
  • William Robert Detzner, retired special education teacher
  • Thomas Gyorog, P.E., Project Manager and Designer of transportation infrastructure projects
  • Jesse Schilling, Certified Management Accountant
  • József Balla, retired teacher and manager of a small business
  • David H. Denham, lifetime experience as Architect
  • Paul S. Forbes, Financial Advice Specialist

My favourite are the ones calling themselves "independent scientist", which means "I have no qualifications, no experience, I don't actually work as a scientist, but I've heard of Albert Einstein".

[–]weavilsatemyface 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

1,600 "scientists" like:

  • Don Andersen, Retired Teacher, Programmer
  • József Balla, retired teacher and manager of a small business
  • David H. Denham, lifetime experience as Architect
  • Paul S. Forbes, Financial Advice Specialist
  • Dr. Volkmar Hierner, degree in business administration and economy
  • Ambassador Jose Brechner, retired Congressman and Ambassador for the Bolivian Government
  • Dr. Grant Armstrong, Leadership development and coaching
  • Patrick Hunt, former member of the Royal Canadian Navy
  • Spyridon Nikiforos, Economist, MBA
  • Dr Simon Idris Beshir, Cardiologist

I always ask a climatologist for medical advice regarding my heart, so I suppose it is fair that I should listen to a cardiologist for information about climate.

So what we've got here is not 1600 scientists but more like 1600 laymen, engineers, doctors, people with vaguely sciencey degrees who have never worked a day as a scientist, and a few actual scientists, almost all of whom are retired or from completely unrelated specialties.

If you count actual climatologists in this list, you get a grand total of exactly... three.

[–]weavilsatemyface 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The petition says "It is not the number of experts but the quality of arguments that counts." Which is good, because 1600 only sounds like a lot of experts if you have no idea how many actual experts in climatology there are, and how many of those 1600 aren't experts at all.

So they fail on the "Quantity" measure. How do they go on "Quality"?

Climate science should be less political

Pure hypocrisy. Its the Denialists, funded by the worst carbon polluters, and their Useful Idiots, who are making this political.

Scientists should openly address uncertainties and exaggerations in their predictions of global warming

They do.

politicians should dispassionately count the real costs as well as the imagined benefits of their policy measures

They do. The Denialists shilling for oil companies are just unhappy that the real costs of fossil fuels are being counted, instead of being swept under the carpet.

Natural as well as anthropogenic factors cause warming

Well duh. Nobody says otherwise.

Warming is far slower than predicted
The world has warmed significantly less than predicted by IPCC on the basis of modeled anthropogenic forcing.

Half true. If you take the worst case prediction, the world has warmed less than predicted. If you take the best case prediction, the world has warmed more than predicted and if you take the most likely case, the actual warming is pretty damned close to the prediction.

Climate policy relies on inadequate models

Well, maybe, maybe not, but they're the best we have.

They do not only exaggerate the effect of greenhouse gases, they also ignore the fact that enriching the atmosphere with CO2 is beneficial.

The first part is just wrong. The second part is Not Even Wrong.

CO2 is plant food, the basis of all life on Earth

Okay, we can stop reading right here. The people making this disingenuous argument aren't arguing in good faith. Anyone claiming to be a scientist who makes this argument is not serious. It's a bullshit answer.

[–]IkeConn 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The wokies and lefties drank the Kool-Aid.