This is the third in a seven part series detailing our objections to plans by the United States Environmental Protection Agency to claim unlimited power over the life of every American. Those plans were laid out in an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR), dated July 11, 2008. The EPA is inviting comments to this advance notice. This article explains the second of our six major objections to the EPA plans. The total of our objections, including our letter, our comments, and a link to the EPA website, may be accessed at: http://www.classicalideals.com/EPA_Ruination.htm
Comment Number Two: There is No Natural Evidence for Man-made Global Warming
We oppose these measures on the grounds of natural history, because claims to man-made global warming contradict the evidence from Earth’s past and present.
The provisions in the ANPR are based on a specious, unproven, scientifically unsupported, a-historical claim that impending disaster is caused by our very prosperity. This claim is leading us into the clear and present danger of federal economic controls imposed on a scale previously intolerable in the United States.
As a bedrock to its proposals the EPA has accepted the conclusions of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that man-made global warming is a settled issue. But the evidence of natural history shows no causal connection between so-called greenhouse gases and global temperatures. For a half a billion years, temperatures have risen and fallen independently of carbon dioxide (CO2) concentrations.
The EPA is also following the decision of the US Supreme Court that CO2, a natural compound vital to all living organisms, is a “pollutant.” This ruling contradicts the evidence of natural history, the facts of biology, and the wisdom gleaned by farmers from 8,000 years of agriculture.
Claims that the Earth is now undergoing an unprecedented rise in temperature—both in absolute terms and in the rate of increase—should be examined using precedents from the long-term history of the Earth.[1] At least seven major ice age cycles have occurred in the last billion years, when mile-deep ice sheets periodically advanced beyond polar areas and engulfed regions that were once warm, before again melting in retreat. On a shorter timescale, some eleven glacial and interglacial periods have cycled during the past one million years. We are now living in a temporary interglacial warm period, the Holocene, that began with a relatively sudden rise in temperature about 11,000 years ago. We should expect the next glacial period to begin in the near future, meaning a few thousand years. These cyclical temperature changes in the Earth’s prehistory have far surpassed the lesser variations since the dawn of industrial life.
Cartoon by Cox and Forkum
What causes such temperature variations? One of the central tenets of the man-made global warming hypothesis is that high atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide (CO2) have a direct effect on temperatures around the globe. The thermometer, however, was not invented until the Renaissance. Scientists must study ancient temperatures and chemical concentrations indirectly, by gathering “proxy data” taken from fossils, tree rings, ice cores, coral reefs, peat bog cellulose and other evidence. All of this requires highly technical scientific interpretation, and is subject to new discoveries and complex methods of statistical analysis.
Using information derived from such proxy measurements, it is possible to reconstruct, at least roughly, temperature levels and the CO2 concentrations going back into the Earth’s deep history. Dr. Christopher Scotese, a geologist at the University of Texas at Arlington, used ancient evidence and computer models to determine average temperatures going back over 600 million years ago (mya).[2] Other scientists have worked to determine CO2 concentrations.[3] A basic outline of these CO2 and temperature reconstructions is as follows (values are rounded to the accuracy implied in the figures). Bear in mind that the average temperature today is about 59°F, and CO2 is about 380 parts per million (ppm):
- From 600 to 430 mya, CO2 was about 5000ppm; temperature was about 72°F. (One model has CO2 up to 7000 ppm, another as lower than 5000 ppm)
- From 430 to 360 mya, CO2 fell below 1500ppm; temperatures shifted from 72°F to 54°F, then back up to 72°F
- From 360 to 245 mya, CO2 fell to about 1000ppm; temperatures fell back to 54°F, then returned to 72°F, after a spike to 74°F
- From 245 to 146 mya, CO2 held near 1000ppm; temperature stayed near 72°F, until falling to about 60°F. (Other reconstructions show CO2 as rising to about 2000 ppm about 200 mya, until falling again)
- From 146 to 65 mya, CO2 decreased to 750ppm or less; temperatures—trending opposite to CO2—rose to 72°F
- From 65 into the present, CO2 decreased to under 300ppm. Temperatures held at 72°F—far higher than today—then fell to 54°F before beginning to rise
This graph, Figure 1, illustrates these general trends. The heavy line shows average temperatures, the thin line shows a rough average of atmospheric CO2 concentrations:
Overall, the average global temperature has moved up and down between 54°F to 72°F, while atmospheric CO2 concentrations dropped from about 5000 to under 300ppm. If man-made global warming theory is correct, the Earth should have been blistering hot when CO2 was 16 times higher than today, and temperatures should have fallen when CO2 levels moved below 1000ppm. Even if other factors mitigated extreme temperature changes, there should be some correlation between temperatures and CO2. The Earth’s temperatures, however, varied independently of the CO2. The Earth was an average of 72°F—far higher than today—when CO2 was both 5000ppm and under 750ppm.
Figure 1
Dr. R. Tim Patterson, professor of geology at Carleton University and director of the Ottawa-Carleton Geoscience Centre, wonders “whether Earth's climate record actually supports the assumption that CO2 is a major climate driver.”[4] He reminds us that during an ice age about 450 million years ago, carbon dioxide concentrations were about 15 times higher than at present. He concludes that there is “no statistical correlation between the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere through the last 500 million years and the temperature record in this interval.”
Scientists from the University of New Mexico wrote that their studies of goethite [iron oxide] formations in Wisconsin “suggest that 440 Myr ago [million years ago] atmospheric CO2 was ~ 16 times higher than today. However, this enhanced level of atmospheric CO2 does not seem to have been accompanied by unusually warm temperatures in the tropics, and in fact may have been contemporaneous with high-latitude continental glaciation on Gondwanaland [the southern super-continent].”[5]
Some scientists will dispute the precise figures here, and man-made global warming supporters will attack this overview as simplistic, but it remains clear that overall, global temperatures and CO2 variables have not at all correlated as the man-made global warming hypothesis requires and its proponents have maintained. This strongly suggests that other natural factors, not atmospheric CO2 concentrations, were controlling the temperature changes.
Variations During the Past Five-hundred Thousand Years
A picture of the more immediate past is seen in reconstructions of temperatures and CO2 concentrations derived from Antarctic ice core samples collected at the Russian Vostok Research Station. The ice core reached down over 3300 meters to reveal ice as old as 422,000 years. Scientists determine ancient temperatures by analyzing the ratio of heavier oxygen-18 to ordinary oxygen-16, and heavier deuterium-2 to ordinary hydrogen-1, in the ice.
Over the 422,000 years, temperatures have varied nearly 22°F, from about 16°F below to 6°F above the temperatures of the past century.[6] Scientists have noted that CO2 levels today “seem to have been unprecedented during the past 420,000 years.”[7] But the highest temperatures recorded in the ice core samples are about 6°F higher than today, at 128,357 and 323,482 years ago. If CO2 levels today are “unprecedented” and CO2 causes warming, then why are temperatures today lower than at several times in the Antarctic past?
Scientists working under the auspices of the Scripps Institute of Oceanography brought greater precision to their reading of the Vostok data. In the abstract of their published research, they wrote: “High-resolution records from Antarctic ice cores show that carbon dioxide concentrations increased by 80 to 100 parts per million by volume 600 ± 400 years after the warming of the last three deglaciations. Despite strongly decreasing temperatures, high carbon dioxide concentrations can be sustained for thousands of years during glaciations . . .” (emphasis added)[8]
Patterson recognized that the time lag between rising or falling temperature and rising or falling CO2 is about 800 years. To illustrate the causal implications of this relationship, he draws an analogy with human history. If you think that climate is being driven by CO2, “then you probably would have no difficulty in accepting the idea that Winston Churchill was instrumental in the defeat of King Herold by Duke William of Orange at the Battle of Hastings in 1066.”
Dr. Willie Soon of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics agrees that “Atmospheric CO2 variations generally follow changes in temperature and other climatic variables rather than preceding them.” [9]
In his book An Inconvenient Truth, Al Gore ignores this time lag in order to create a false image of a frightening rise in temperature caused by CO2 emissions today.[10] He graphs CO2 and temperatures as rising and falling in parallel, thus depicting the “repeating correlation” that Patterson discussed: the two lines move in tandem, and the spike in CO2 to over 350ppm today runs ominously off the graph.
But Gore’s visually impressive graph distorts the issue in two ways. First, it does not accommodate the earlier CO2 levels of up to 5000ppm, or 16 times those of today. The graph we have presented in this article, Figure 1 above, has a higher vertical CO2 axis, and depicts today’s CO2 variations in accurate proportion to earlier changes: as tiny waves at the bottom right-hand side of the graph. Gore also omits values on the temperature axis, an egregious omission that makes it impossible to quantify the scale of temperature variations.
Second, Gore adds to the confusion by conflating correlation with causation. His parallel CO2 and temperature lines obscure the fact that large temperature rises preceded small CO2 rises by 500 to 1500 years. Perhaps it is inconvenient for Gore to accept that the huge 22°F temperature changes in the Vostok ice core samples cannot be explained by the tiny—100ppm—changes in CO2 that followed those temperature changes.
Gore’s CO2 / temperature graph is a distortion of the historical record designed to elicit an emotional response for a political purpose.
Variations over the past 30 Centuries (1,000 BC to Present)
During their early history human beings emitted no industrial CO2, and were vulnerable to the vagaries of weather, disease, and famine. Natural disasters were blamed on supernatural beings and forces. Life was nasty, poor, brutish, and short. But by 1,000 BC, human beings had lived in settled communities for several thousand years. Following a cold period between about 800 and 400 BC, temperatures in Europe rose from approximately 400 BC to AD 200, the Roman Warm Period. A cold period followed between ca. AD 200 and 900, during the European Dark Ages. The Medieval Warm Period (ca. 900–1350) was at least 2°F warmer than today. At this time the English grew grapes and produced wine, European agriculture and cathedral architecture prospered, the precursors to modern universities were established, merchants were active over widening trade routes, and the Vikings settled Greenland before moving west into North America. No catastrophic climate events resulted from this 2+°F warming of the planet.[11]
Around 1450 the temperature in Europe plunged into the Little Ice Age (1450–1850).[12] England’s Thames River froze during the winter, many crops failed in Europe, the Vikings abandoned Greenland to the snow and ice, and priests prayed for a halt to advancing glaciers that threatened Alpine villages.[13] British naval log books promise to reveal more of the stormy character of the weather during this cold period.[14] When George Washington crossed the Delaware River on Christmas Eve 1776, he faced huge ice floes, which an artist depicted as plausible 75 years later.[15]
Had the people of Washington’s day been eager to blame themselves for natural events, feverish cries of impending inundation with ice would have risen along with demands to curtail human action. The English king might have directed his power toward shutting down artisans, laboratories and merchants, and there might have been no Industrial Revolution. Had this industrial shutdown occurred, the Earth would have continued to warm and to cool by natural factors, but we today, bereft of industry, would be far less able to adapt to those cycles.
Things began to warm in the 19th century. From the mid 1800s to 1940 American industrialists built on the scientific revolution of the prior two centuries, within a political system that recognized their freedom to think and to act independently of the dogmas of church, crown, and community. For the first time they produced coal and oil-fired industries, electrical power plants, and mass quantities of consumer goods. Automobiles, telephones, radios, railroads, and ships shrank the continents and the oceans. These advancements exceeded anything in history, and demonstrate that the cause of human prosperity is not the Earth’s climate. Atmospheric CO2 concentrations rose perhaps 16ppm along with the temperatures, a welcome reversal of the Little Ice Age and a return to the earlier warm periods.
From 1940 to 1976, America and the free world built myriad fossil-fuel electric power plants, while high-rise buildings inscribed new skylines for cities, industrial manufacturing escalated, petroleum vehicles flooded America’s new interstate highway system, and medicines became widely available. The human environment in the industrialized nations—the physical context in which we live—improved greatly over any other time in history. Life-spans increased and infant mortality rates fell. The Earth’s population soared to over four billion—an increase that correlates directly with higher emissions of CO2 by industrial activity––while temperatures dropped by about 0.45°F.
Surface thermometers used to construct a temperature record back to the 1850s show a warming trend for the past several decades.[16] Since 1978 scientists have realized that the data from surface temperature monitoring stations have been skewed by the urban heat effects of human activity, exacerbated by the poor placement of the stations. The Lodi, California thermometer, for instance, is next to the parking lot of a fire station in a residential area—and, predictably, it has recorded a temperature rise of up to 4°F in the past 40 years.[17]
When California stations are statistically separated according to the populations of the counties in which they are located, higher population counties record higher and steeper temperature increases.[18] Social, economic and political factors have distorted the global temperature record; when the Soviet Union collapsed, for instance, thousands of stations in Siberia were lost, which caused an upward shift in global temperature averages.[19]
In 1999 a U.S. National Research Council panel, chaired by Dr. Tom Karl, director of the National Climatic Data Center, which included man-made global warming proponent Dr. James Hansen of the Goddard Institute for Space Studies, issued a report that asked:
Are we making the measurements, collecting the data, and making it available in a way that both today's scientist, as well as tomorrow's, will be able to effectively increase our understanding of natural and human-induced climate change? The Panel on Climate Observing Systems Status would answer the latter question with an emphatic NO. . . . these systems require immediate action to reverse their decay and to redesign them.[20]
Since 1979, satellites have allowed us to literally rise above the limitations of surface stations, to take systematic measurements across vast oceans and unpopulated land areas, and to draw data representative of the entire Earth. In 1989 NASA scientists Dr. Roy Spencer and Dr. John Christy developed the first global temperature data set from satellite microwave data.[21] Satellite data collection remains the most comprehensive and reliable global measurement method.
According to the satellite record, from 1979 to 1996 temperatures varied by about .4°F, and in 1996 were at about the same level as in 1979. Prior to 2007, temperatures were at most “trending up at a modest 0.125° [C] per decade” (about 0.22°F).[22] From 1998 (when El Niño caused a temperature spike of about 0.8°F) until 2007, temperatures have stayed flat or fallen. Temperatures decreased by 1.2°F during 2007 alone, the same amount that they may have increased from 1880 to 2000, despite the additional atmospheric CO2 from tremendous industrial growth during the 20th century.
Patterson asks vital questions about the CO2 global-warming hypothesis:
1. If CO2 is of such critical importance to climate change why was there a large temperature rise prior to the early 1940s when 80 percent of the human produced carbon dioxide was produced after World War II?
2. When CO2 levels finally began to increase dramatically in the postwar years why was there a concomitant interval of about 30 years of cooling?
One would think that if CO2 had such critical control over climate that the relative abundance of CO2 in the atmosphere would be in lock step with global temperature. Many researchers realize the difficulties that are presented by trying to make CO2 the key factor in climate change. . . . In conclusion, the geologic record clearly shows us that there really is little correlation between CO2 levels and temperature.[23]
To dramatize his claim that temperatures today are skyrocketing, Al Gore reproduces a version of the famous “hockey stick” temperature graph, which shows flat temperatures for the last 1000 years, until a huge rise in the past century punctuates the page.[24] This graph was developed by Dr. Michael Mann and others, and was used to publicize claims to the climate warming crisis.[25]
But Ross McKitrick and Stephen McIntyre questioned the statistical methods used to create the graph, and found that they got the same “hockey stick” shape when they fed data created by a random number generator into Mann’s software program.[26] These concerns led to a Congressional investigation headed by Dr. Edward Wegman and a team of statisticians, who found fatal methodological errors in Mann’s graph and supported the analysis of McKitrick and McIntyre.[27]
The graph had been displayed authoritatively in the 2001 report of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), but has been dropped from the 2007 version. Al Gore still relies heavily on this discredited graph to support his political agenda.
Politicians and political institutions aside, many scientists have come to recognize that the lack of correlation between CO2 and warming requires different explanations for temperature changes. Joel E. Kauffman, professor emeritus in the Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of the Sciences in Philadelphia, noted that
Claimed human-caused warming of the Earth to dangerous and unprecedented levels by human-related emissions of carbon dioxide is contradicted mainly by a non-correlation of carbon dioxide levels with warming.
What is the most plausible primary cause of the rise and fall in temperatures over history? Dr. Kauffman offers “plausible alternative causes,” including “variations in solar output and cosmic ray intensity.”[28]
The search for causes of temperature changes takes us off the planet to its primary source of energy, the sun, and its effects on water vapor, the most potent greenhouse gas. Dr. Boris Winterhalter has also drawn connections between solar phenomena and the Earth’s climate: "The effect of solar winds on cosmic radiation has just recently been established and, furthermore, there seems to be a good correlation between cloudiness and variations in the intensity of cosmic radiation. Here we have a mechanism which is a far better explanation to variations in global climate than the attempts by IPCC to blame it all on anthropogenic input of greenhouse gases."[29]
As Norwegian scientist and solar expert Pål Brekke put it, “It's possible that the sun plays an even more central role in global warming than we have suspected.”[30]
It is no accident that the Little Ice Age reached its apogee during the Maunder Minimum, when sunspot activity was nil (AD 1645-1715). Astronomer Ian Wilson and others have noted that two recent cool periods, the Dalton Minimum (1800-1820) and the Victorian Minimum (1880-1900), followed specific changes in solar activity, which suggest that we today, in 2008, are about to witness the start of two or three decades of cooling.[31]
This brief overview of the Earth’s climate history leads to the conclusion that predictions of imminent climate disaster are deeply ahistorical. No extraordinary evidence in history has been presented for the extraordinary claims of climate disaster; indeed the claims run counter to historical evidence.
In summary, the last 500 million years of data reveal an energetic and immensely complex set of factors that constitute the Earth’s climate. Scientists do not understand it well enough either to posit a single cause of climate change or to create software programs to replicate it.[32] The science of such a massive, unsettled system is never settled. But we do know that we did not cause such changes a million years ago, and that should we pass out of existence tomorrow the ice would eventually return.
Based on natural history, there is no basis for assuming the truth of an impending climate crisis caused by human action.
Further Reading: EPA Fascism versus America: There Is No "Consensus" Among Scientists (4 of 7)
[1] S. Fred Singer and Dennis T. Avery, Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1,500 Years (Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, 2007), xvii-xxii for a non-technical summary of climate history.
[2] Christopher R. Scotese, Paleomap Project: http://www.scotese.com/climate.htm.
[3] Noam M. Bergman et al, “COPSE: A New Model of Biogeochemical Cycling over Phanerozoic Time,” American Journal of Science 301 (2004): 182-204. R.A. Berner, and Z. Kothavala, “GEOCARB III: A Revised Model of Atmospheric CO2 over Phanerozoic Time,” American Journal of Science 304 (2001): 397–437. Daniel H. Rothman, “Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Levels for the Last 500 Million Years,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 99, no. 7 (2001): 4167-4171. Dana L.Royer et al, “CO2 as a Primary Driver of Phanerozoic Climate,” GSA Today 14, no. 3 (2004): 4-10. A graph is by Robert A. Rohde, Plot of Carbon Dioxide History of the Ancient Earth: http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2006/11/06/science/earth/20061107_CO2_GRAPHIC.html. Berner’s graph is reproduced in S. Fred Singer, Hot Talk, Cold Science: Global Warming’s Unfinished Debate (Oakland: The Independent Institute, 1999), 5.
[4] Tim Patterson, “The Geologic Record and Climate Change,” presentation at the Risk: Regulation and Reality Conference, October 7, 2004, Toronto: http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=010405M.
[5] Crayton J. Yapp and Harald Poths, “Ancient Atmospheric C02 Pressures Inferred from Natural Goethites,” Nature 355 (23 January 1992): 342- 344: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v355/n6358/abs/355342a0.html.
[6] Vostok data: http://cdiac.esd.ornl.gov/ftp/trends/temp/vostok/vostok.1999.temp.dat. For analysis: Jean Jouzel et al, “Vostok Ice Core: A Continuous Isotope Temperature Record Over the Last Climatic Cycle (160,000 years),” Nature 329 (1987): 403-8. Jean Jouzel et al, “Extending the Vostok Ice-core Record of Palaeoclimate to the Penultimate Glacial Period,” Nature 364 (1993): 407-12. Jean Jouzel et al, “Climatic Interpretation of the Recently Extended Vostok Ice Records,” Climate Dynamics 12 (1996) :513-521. Jean Robert Petit et al, “Climate and Atmospheric History of the Past 420,000 Years from the Vostok Ice Core, Antarctica,” Nature 399 (1999): 429-436.
[7] Jean Robert Petit et al, “Historical Isotopic Temperature Record from the Vostok Ice Core,” Trends: A Compendium of Data on Global Change, Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, 2000: http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/temp/vostok/jouz_tem.htm.
[8] Hubertus Fischer et al, “Ice Core Records of Atmospheric CO2 Around the Last Three Glacial Terminations,” Science, 283, no. 5408 (March 12, 1999): 1712 – 1714: http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/sci;283/5408/1712.
[9] Willie Soon et al,“Implications of the Secondary Role of Carbon Dioxide and Methane Forcing in Climate Change: Past, Present and Future,” Physical Geography 28, no.2 (2007): 97-125.
[10] Al Gore, An Inconvenient Truth (NY: Rodale, 2006), 66-67.
[11] Singer and Avery, Unstoppable, 61-99 summarize the evidence for these periods.
[12] Spencer, “Statement to the Committee,” 5 for direct physical evidence of the warm period and Little Ice Age.
[13] Brian Fagan, The Little Ice Age: How Climate Made History 1300–1850 (NY: Basic Books, 2000).
[14] Dennis Wheeler, “Climatic Reconstructions for the Northeast Atlantic Region AD 1685-1700: A New Source of Evidence from Naval Logbooks,” The Holocene 16, no. 1 (2006): 39-49.
[15] Washington Crossing the Delaware, Emanuel Gottlieb Leutze, 1851: http://www.metmuseum.org/explore/gw/el_gw.htm.
[16] Compiled by the Climatic Research Unit, East Anglia University, and the UK Met. Office Hadley Centre, updated by Phil Jones: http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/info/warming/. Major source: Philip Brohan et al, “Uncertainty Estimates in Regional and Global Observed Temperature Changes: A New Dataset from 1850,” Journal of Geophysical Research 111 (2006), D24S08, doi:10.1029/2006JD008229.
[17] At http://www.surfacestations.org/; photos of surface stations are at http://gallery.surfacestations.org. N.B. the station at Marysville, California, next to a parking lot, cell tower, and air conditioning vents.
[18] J. D. Goodridge, “Comments on Regional Simulations of Greenhouse Warming Including Natural Variability,” Bulletin of the American Meteorology Society 77, no. 3-4 (1996), reproduced in Singer, Hot Talk, 13.
[19] Ross R. McKitrick and Patrick J. Michaels, “Quantifying the Influence of Anthropogenic Surface Processes and Inhomogeneities on Gridded Global Climate Data,” Journal of Geophysical Research 112 (2007) D24S09, doi:10.1029/2007JD008465.
[20] Panel on Climate Observing Systems Status Climate Research Committee, the Board on Atmospheric Sciences and Climate, and the Commission on Geosciences, Environment, and Resources, Adequacy of Climate Observing Systems (Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1999), x, 2: http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=6424.
[21] Since Spencer and Christy left NASA, over disagreements with NASAs position on man-made global warming, the satellite data have been harder to access on NASA’s website, buried in computer models that support the man-made global warming hypothesis.
[22] From a temperature graph by John Christy, in Singer and Avery, Unstoppable, xxii.
[23] Patterson, “Geological Record.”
[24] Gore, Inconvenient, 63. To heighten the political effect, Gore has temperatures above the centerline in red, and those below in blue.
[25] Michael E. Mann et al, “Global-scale Temperature Patterns and Climate Forcing over the Past Six Centuries,” Nature 392: 779-787.
[26] Stephen McIntyre and Ross McKitrick, “Corrections to the Mann et al (1998) Proxy Data Base and Northern Hemisphere Average Temperature Series,” Energy and Environment 14 no. 6 , 751-772 challenged the statistical methodology.
[27] Testimony of Dr. Edward Wegman, House Committee on Energy and Commerce, July 19, 2006: http://energycommerce.house.gov/reparchives/108/Hearings/ 07192006hearing1987/Wegman.pdf. Lawrence Solomon, The Deniers (Richard Vigilante Books, 2008), 9-21, on the rise and fall of the “hockey stick” graph. Wegman used statistics to show that the original peer-review process was skewed by the social relationships between Mann and the reviewers.
[28] Joel M. Kauffman, “Climate Change Reëxamined,” Journal of Scientific Exploration, 21 no. 4 (2007): 723–749. Also, Henrik Svenmark and Nigel Calder, The Chilling Stars: A New Theory of Climate Change 2nd edition (Thirplow: Icon, 2008). Svenmark is director of the Centre for Sun-Climate Research at the Danish Space Research Institute. Nir Shaviv and Ján Veizer (2003). “Celestial Driver of Phanerozoic Climate?,” GSA Today July 2003: 4-10. Veizer is is emeritus professor of Earth Sciences at the University of Ottawa. Shaviv is at the Racah Institute of Physics, Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
[29] Winterhalter is quoted in the U.S. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, Minority Report, December 20, 2007: http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.SenateReport. He is former professor of marine geology at University of Helsinki.
[30] Research Council of Norway,
http://www.forskningsradet.no/en/News/Pal+Brekke+Internationally +renowned+climate+sceptic+and+solar+expert/1203528336519.
[31] Ian R. G. Wilson et al, “Does a Spin–Orbit Coupling Between the Sun and the Jovian Planets Govern the Solar Cycle?” Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia 25, no. 2 (June 26 , 2008): 85–93: http://www.publish.csiro.au/nid/138/paper/AS06018.htm. The cooling should start in the late 2010s and continue for 20 to 30 more years, the amount of cooling predicted to be about 1.8 to 3.6°F
[32] Singer and Avery, Unstoppable, 137-148 criticizes the models.
