“NASA’s top administrator, Michael Griffin, speaking on National Public Radio (NPR) in the US made some refreshingly sensible comments about the present global warming scare,” said Robert Ferguson, Director of the Science and Public Policy Institute.
“Many rationalist scientists agree with him, clearly demonstrating there is no scientific consensus on man-made, catastrophic global warming,” said Ferguson.
Griffin said he doubted global warming is “a problem we must wrestle with,” and that it is arrogant to believe that today’s climate is the best we could have and that “we need to take steps to make sure that it doesn't change.”
While NASA scientist, James Hansen, was sharply critical of his boss, other scientists from around the world came to Griffin’s support.
Said Dr. Walter Starck, an Australian marine scientist, “Griffin makes an important distinction between the scientific findings of climate change and dramatic predictions of catastrophic consequences accompanied by policy demands. The former can be evaluated by its evidence, but; the latter rest only on assertions and claims to authority. Alternate predictions of benefits from projected changes have been proposed with comparable authority and plausibility. For example, unless one chooses to define the Little Ice Age as "normal" and "optimal" the net effect of any warming has only been beneficial and any anthropogenic contribution very small indeed. Dramatic predictions of imminent disaster have a near perfect record of failure. Griffin's note of caution in the escalating concern over climate change deserves sober consideration.
Another Australian, who testified before a Senate panel last year, Professor Robert Carter, observed, “My main reaction to Michael Griffin is to congratulate him on his clear-sightedness, not to mention his courage in speaking out on such a controversial topic.”
Dr. Tim Ball, a Canadian climatologist, responded: “Griffin's statement is sensible because it allows time for the testing of the man-made global warming hypothesis to continue as it should."
“I certainly support Griffin's comments,” said William Kininmonth, a former head of the Australian National Climate Centre. “Not only is it speculative to claim that humans can in any way influence the course of climate but it is arrogant to suggest that today's climate is getting worse than it has been in the past. For example, who would prefer to return to pre-industrial conditions as they were during the Little Ice Age? Frost Fairs were common on many rivers of Europe and the London diarist John Evelyn records that in 1683-84 the Thames River froze from late December to early February. Conditions were terrible with men and cattle perishing and the seas locked with ice such that no vessels could stir out or come in. The fowls, fish and exotic plants and greens were universally perishing. Food and fuel were exceptionally dear and coal smoke hung so thickly that one could scarcely see across the street and one could scarcely breathe.”
Kansas geologist, Lee Gerhard added, “Griffin’s statement focuses on the hubris that affects much of public
policy. It is great to know that someone out there besides geologists understands that humans do not dominate earth's dynamic systems.
Said Ross McKitrick, an economist at the University of Guelph, “Claims of major, impending catastrophe are speculative and go far beyond what has been credibly established by researchers to date. Hence Griffin's view is not at all controversial or out of step with available evidence, and he should be commended for having the courage to say it. The fact that it took courage, however, points to the deeper problem that questioning the catastrophic propaganda we hear so much is now considered politically incorrect.”
Dr. Pat Michaels at the University of Virginia agrees: “NASA Administrator Michael Griffin’s statement about whether or not it is in fact a “problem” is supported by a scientific literature that his employee, James Hansen, appears to ignore. It is well-known that much of the Eurasian arctic was between 4 and 12 degrees (F) warmer than modern temperatures for much of the 6,000 years between 3,000 and 9,000 years ago, and that such warming was caused by a massive intrusion of warm Atlantic water into the arctic. Given that the only way it can get there is to flow east of Greenland, Mr. Hansen’s well-publicized fears that a massive amount of Greenland’s ice will fall into the ocean in the next 100 years is mere science fiction. It is ironic that today President Bush appears to have given in to Hansen’s hysteria rather than to the calm reason of NASA Administrator Griffin.
Finally, Harvard University physicist Lubos Motl praised Griffin's climate comments, calling them "sensible." On his public blog, Motl said he applauds Michael Griffin and encourages him to act as “a self-confident boss of a highly prestigious institution.” “I have always believed that the people who actually work with hard sciences and technology simply shouldn't buy a cheap and soft pseudoscientific propaganda such as the 'fight against climate change,'" Motl added.
This is a media release from the Science and Public Policy Institute.
Emitting CO2 is not the same thing as "trashing the environment." The environment likes CO2. Dude.
Well you've never rebutted my claims that you're a tosser either. (That's a joke mate - Aussies take the piss)
I looked up neo-marxism and western marxism in Wiki. Looks like I'd have a lot of study to do to be a good marxist. Or neo-marxist.
Did I say was against private property or personal rights? You've just assumed I was.
I don't want to regulate people's lives and tell them what to do (beyond what's absolutely necessary). All for individual self-determinism.
But I did say it was unacceptable to trash the environment with impunity. The word is impunity. Some modification of the natural world is absolutely necessary. But there are limits surely. I'm fine really with agriculure, chemicals in agriculture used responsibly and GM technology. But I appreciate the need to do better. - small example - Australian farmers used to have continual problems with disposal of chemical drums - a small amount of thinking has now progressed to reusable plastic crates in steel mesh. Bulk systems of storage. No drums and a better system - so was that that hard really?? Did it severely impinge your rights that much??
In terms of hurling offal Schillsy you do too. But you think it's acceptable if the enemy is left or green in persuasion. It's just you guys aren't used to getting it back.
You see I'd like to believe in a better world where we might use our intelligence, technology and cooperative behaviour to improve things. Is that so bad? I'm not out to shut you down.
And as you get older it starts to dawn on you that you can't take it with you.
And so the big disappointment here is that we never progress to a consideration of making things better. Improvement through compromise, smart thinking and dialogue.
Luke,
You hurl offal like an expert in the field, but you never rebutted my claims that you're a neo-Marxist, claiming you want "democratic" power while actually demanding an end to private property and personal rights.
Dude.
Schiller's first mistake. He thinks we're marxists. No - we just don't like people like Schiller or what he stands for. So he thinks we're marxists. That's the actual size of the totalitarian brain space. The reality is Schiller that the DDT scam is a big tobacco smoke screen ! And that is criminal. And the same with most of the other astroturfing b/s you're on about. This is Australia mate and yank bulldust doesn't wash. Try getting fair dinkum for once.
The government can guarantee your freedoms as much as you like but not when it starts impinging on me for your benefit (mate!).
Schiller,
My reference to AG was with respect to sadistic acts perpetrated for...?....totalitarians fighting not a hot or cold war but a useless one you can't win. I'm quite sure the soldiers there said sorry too, before they committed heinous crimes and filmed them whilst they laughed their freedom-fighting butts off. If you want to talk sensible in-context discussions Schiller, I suggest you delete this blog website from your computer 'favourites' now.
Travis,
I am quite certain that some here, such as yourself, are tired of "greenie" arguments. I assure you, there are others who are tired of arguments made by greenies.
As between the two groups, malice and sadism is commonplace, so you don't present any novel observation.
Your reference to Abu Ghraib is not very sensible in the context of this discussion. Perhaps you could explain.
Has it ever occurred to you Schiller that some here might be tired of your 'greenie' arguments you like to trot out? Anyone who makes an apology only to intentionally retract it in the next sentence is malicious and sadistic. Go hang out at Abu Ghraib.
Luke,
I am familiar with the tired Marxist arguments you like to trot out. You call me a "totalitarian" because you perceive that I am against the "free choice" of people who want to issue diktats that kill personal freedom.
That is chicanery. And we fought wars against creeps like you. We won the hot war, and then the cold war, and then your creepy system collapsed of its own weight.
I'm a totalitarian, if that means I'm free to 'tend my own garden,' as Voltaire would say. And I'm a totalitarian to the extent that I believe government should totally guarantee my freedoms, to the widest extent possible.
Sorry if that offends your tender Marxist sentiments.
No, not really. And Marxist sentiments aren't tender.
Well you are against free choice Schiller - you just can't help it that you're essentially totalitarian in outlook. We fought wars against creeps like you.
Well, Luke,
Judging by the quality of your rhetoric and your closely-reasoned arguments, I have become convinced of... hmph. What was that?
Something about incarceration, treason, lying, conniving, being a 'grub,' perhaps doing these things on a butt, totalitarianism, anti-capitalism, anti-freedom, anti-choice, being scum, DDT, tobacco, and maybe some "campaign" which weaves these odd threads into something you seem to comprehend well enough to rant about.
Luke, you forgot to put the aluminum foil under your toupee today, you are inadvertently channeling others' cell phone conversations.