The 2008 International Conference on Climate Change is the first major international conference to focus on issues and questions not answered by advocates of the theory of man-made global warming.
Hundreds of scientists, economists, and public policy experts from around the world will gather on March 2-4, 2008, at the Marriott New York Marquis Hotel on Manhattan’s Time Square, to call attention to widespread dissent in the scientific community to the alleged “consensus” that the modern warming is primarily man-made and is a crisis.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
UPDATE
I was a delegate at the 2008 International Conference on Climate Change, March 2-4, 2008, New York City.
You can read some of my blog posts on the conference at the following links:
March 03, 2008
Climate Change Conference, New York – Day 1, In Review
March 04, 2008
Climate Change Conference, New York – Day 2, In Review
March 06, 2008
Climate Change Conference, New York – Day 3, In Review
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The debate over whether human activity is responsible for some or all of the modern warming, and then what to do if our presence on Earth is indeed affecting the global climate, has enormous consequences for everyone in virtually all parts of the globe. Proposals to drive down human greenhouse gas emissions by raising energy costs or imposing draconian caps could dramatically affect the quality of life of people in developed countries, and, due to globalization, the lives of people in less-developed countries too.
The global warming debate that the public and policymakers usually see is one-sided, dominated by government scientists and government organizations agenda-driven to find data that suggest a human impact on climate and to call for immediate government action, if only to fund their own continued research, but often to achieve political agendas entirely unrelated to the science of climate change. There is another side, but in recent years it has been denied a platform from which to speak.
The 2008 International Conference on Climate Change promises to be an exciting event and the point of departure for future conferences, publications, and educational campaigns to present both sides of this important topic.
The goals of the 2008 International Conference on Climate Change are:
1. to bring together the world’s leading scientists, economists, and policy experts to explain the often-neglected “other side” of the climate change debate;
2. to sponsor presentations and papers that make genuine contributions to the global debate over climate change;
3. to share the results of the conference with policymakers, civic and business leaders, and the interested public as an antidote to the one-sided and alarmist bias that pervades much of the current public policy debate; and
4. to set the groundwork for future conferences and publications that can turn the debate toward sound science and economics, and away from hype and political manipulation.
The 2008 International Conference on Climate Change is the first major international conference questioning global warming alarmism, but it will not be the last one. This event is intended to be a catalyst for future meetings, collaboration among scientists, economists, and policy experts, new research, and new publications.
The proceedings will be transcribed, edited, and published as a major contribution to the debate over global warming. Other possible follow-up activities now being discussed include:
1. an event in London in 2009;
2. launch of a new journal devoted to climate change;
3. launch of an association of philanthropists willing to support further research and public education opposing global warming alarmism;
4. support for an International Climate Science Coalition that will act as an alternative voice to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; and
5. expanded cooperation among the scores of organizations currently sponsoring research, publications, and events on the dubious claims in support of the theory of man-made catastrophic global warming.
James M. Taylor
Senior Fellow
The Heartland Institute
For more information visit: http://www.heartland.org/NewYork08/program.cfm
I will be there.
-----------------
UPDATE
I was a delegate at the 2008 International Conference on Climate Change, March 2-4, 2008, New York City.
You can read some of my blog posts on the conference at the following links:
February 25, 2008
The 2008 International Conference on Climate Change: I'm off to New York
https://climatelab.com.au/blog/archives/002787.html
March 03, 2008
Climate Change Conference, New York – Day 1, In Review
https://climatelab.com.au/blog/archives/002809.html
March 04, 2008
Climate Change Conference, New York – Day 2, In Review
https://climatelab.com.au/blog/archives/002813.html
March 06, 2008
Climate Change Conference, New York – Day 3, In Review
https://climatelab.com.au/blog/archives/002820.html
trade itself has probably derived its name from it, the people of such scrapbook layouts done with the cricut produce of the industry of that country. It comprehends both the inland and fvwrjutois
David Archibald,
there is a major and unfortunate blunder in your paper as presented on Warwick's blog.
You state that "The energy that stops the earth from looking like pluto comes from the sun..."
This is patently not correct.
Insolation contributes about 10% to the earth's heat budget. The remainder comes from natural sources, the main ones being natural radioactive decay and gravitational differentiation. This is how the temperature at the centre of the earth can be about +5000 degrees.
Insolation contributes to variations in temperature at the earths surface, and in the atmosphere, but it contributes nothing to the vast majority of the mass of planet earth.
The earth has a radius of about 6,000 km. Our experiential world extends from the earth's surface to the top of the atmosphere, a near negligible component of the total mass of planet earth.
I think you must correct your paper before it is published.
PP
"Have I said this before? Luke, when the cooling comes next decade, your current frothing at the mouth will be reduced to an intermittent dribble of spittle, diluted by tears."
David, as a person on your side of the issue, I want to say that someone like you, who is persuing the science in this debate, needs to work hard at remaining objective and leave people like Luke to the rest of us.
By the way, it's almost 2 month and the second cycle 24 spot hasn't made an appearance. It's looking more and more like a weak 24. I expect that Hathaway will have to adjust his predictions a third time. 😉
"The global atmosphere will make it's own decision. You won't have anything to do with it (whatever happens). "
You know that is real close to what I have been saying all along.
It's starting to rub off on Luke.
Archie actually thinks he's playing Biggles with his Dad's Army sceptic buddies. What's all this "prevail" crap? It's not WWII mate.
The global atmosphere will make it's own decision. You won't have anything to do with it (whatever happens).
http://www.sacbee.com/101/story/734633.html
Oops. I said she attended 18 AGW conferences. Mayor Fargo actually attended twenty.
My bad.
Take a look at the comment section. It will warm the cockles of your skeptic heart to see the response from my fellow Sacramentans.