In his new book, Inheritors of the Earth, ecologist and environmentalist professor Chris Thomas, overturns the accepted story of declining biodiversity on Earth, revealing how nature is fighting back...His book challenges us to "look positively at the impact of humans on the natural world”. The professor argues many animals and plants actually benefit from our presence, raising biological diversity in most parts of the world and increasing the rate at which new species are formed, perhaps to the highest level in Earth's history. A statement from the university about the book said: "He argues that the fauna and flora of Britain are much richer today than 10,000 years ago as a result of farming, towns, gardening, climate change and the deliberate introduction of exotic species. "When the climate warms, there are more of these heat-loving species available to spread northwards than there are cold-loving species (e.g. those restricted to Scottish mountains) available to die out.
Retired climatologist Prof. Werner Kirstein: CO2 is “a harmless gas.” "When I go back and look at history, there’s absolutely no relationship between CO2 and temperature.” IPCC is about marketing. The IPCC is fundamentally corrupt.” “Today you do not find scientists on the IPCC, instead you have political scientists.”
Climatologist Dr. Roy Spencer: "Sec. Perry goes against the supposed consensus of scientists, it was not outlandish, it wasn’t a denial of a known fact. It was a valid opinion on an uncertain area of science. AMS, me thinks thou doth protest too much...The truth is, no one knows just how much of recent warming was human-caused, including those thousands of 'independent' scientists. They pin the blame on CO2 partly because that’s all they can think of, and we still don’t understand natural sources of climate change."
"Why did AMS stick up for 'consensus': 'All of the scientific institutions are going to jump on the bandwagon, with politically savvy committees agreeing with each other; they are in effect being paid by the government to agree with the consensus through billions of dollars in grants and contracts. If there is no global warming crisis, there would be little congressional funding to study it, and thousands of climate-dependent careers (including mine) simply wouldn’t exist. That money also trickles down to the AMS, which is paid to hold scientific conferences, workshops, and publish the resulting research studies in scientific journals. They have a vested interest in the gravy train continuing."
Meteorologist Anthony Watts: 'For the AMS to admonish Perry that there’s no room for debate on Carbon Dioxide as being the primary driver, is essentially to deny the process of science itself. Science is often right, and also often wrong, but just as often, it is self-correcting. If global warming hadn’t become such an entangled and messy social and political issue, it’s likely that science would have done some levels of self-correction on the issue already.'
Team of Scientists: In the last 20 years, we have released more than a third of all the CO2 produced since the beginning of the industrial period. Yet global mean surface temperature has remained essentially constant for 20 years, a fact that has been acknowledged by the IPCC, whose models failed to predict it. NOAA’s State of the Climate report for 2008 said that periods of 15 years or more without warming would indicate a discrepancy between prediction and observation – i.e., that the models were wrong. Just before the recent naturally occurring el Niño event raised global temperature, there had been 18 years and 9 months without any global warming at all.
The average sea level rise since 1870 has been 1.3-1.5 mm (about a twentieth of an inch) per year.
By withdrawing from the Paris agreement, President Trump did a wonderful thing for America and the world. He showed that advocacy masquerading as science should not be the basis for political decisions. He showed that to put America first is to put the planet first. And, by rejecting the non-problem of man-made global warming, he began the long and necessary process of waking up the likes of Professor Reif to the fact that the diversion of time, effort, and trillions of dollars away from real environmental problems and towards the bogus but (to MIT) profitable non-problem of supposedly catastrophic global warming is as bad for the planet as it is for true science.