Study 'reconstructs sea levels over the past 5.3 million years and shows that sea levels were higher than the present during almost every interglacial period over the past 5.3 million years...Thus, there is no evidence that sea level rise during the present interglacial is unprecedented, unnatural, unusual or any different from that which occurred in prior interglacials, or any evidence of influence by man on sea levels.'
Paper 'studies glacier length data available worldwide since 1800 and finds that glaciers retreated faster during the first half of the 20th century than the second half from 1950-2000. This is the opposite pattern that would be expected if man-made greenhouse gases were the cause, and suggests a natural origin. Most warmists and the IPCC claim man-made greenhouse gases did not begin to affect climate until after 1950, and thus can't be blamed for the fastest rate of glacier retreat from ~1850-1950 and subsequentdeceleration.'
Study reconstructs Arctic sea ice near West Greenland over the past 5,000 years and finds that solar activity "may be an important contributor to the sea-ice changes." The paper shows Total Solar Irradiance [TSI] at the end of the 20th century was at the highest levels of the past 5,000 years, and a correspondence between solar activity and Arctic sea ice concentration.
'Simply put, every hour of work we do cooks the planet and its sensitive ecosystems a little bit more, and going home to relax and enjoy some leisure time is like taking this boiling pot of water off the burner.'
Democrats and environmental activists won’t answer three questions: One, who pays; two, how much; and three, for what result? And they don’t come close to being honest about how their plans would raise just about everyone’s power bills.'
'The article is typical in that it suggests that if Republicans would just get out of the way and allow yet another tax increase, the weather would become more to our liking. But it is dishonest to suggest that we are one tax increase away from arresting climate change, improving the weather or saving the planet. For the New York Times and the authors of the U.N. report to suggest otherwise is the reason why climate alarmists are losing credibility. And the more these alarmists are mocked and scorned for their radical views and condescending lectures, the louder and more threatening they become. The global warming crusaders who like to tout science would know that — scientifically — one tax increase can’t change the weather. So what does enacting a carbon tax actually accomplish? Nothing except lower growth, less prosperity and fewer jobs.'
Dr. Lennart Bengtsson: 'We cannot yet separate well enough the greenhouse effect from other climate influences.' - 'Although the radiative forcing by greenhouse gases (including methane, nitrogen oxides and fluorocarbons) has increased by 2.5 watts per square meter since the mid-19th century, observations show only a moderate warming of 0.8 degrees Celsius...high values of climate sensitivity, however, are not supported by observations...Thus, the warming is significantly smaller than predicted by most climate models...since there is no way to validate them (models), the forecasts are more a matter of faith than a fact.'
The IPCC was created to predetermine a scientific result and amplify it through alarmism. This meant creating a controlled and directed political structure, the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and a politically controlled scientific structure, the IPCC.
Sir John Houghton, formerly head of the UK Met Office (UKMO) and first Co-Chair of the IPCC denies saying “Unless we announce disasters, no one will listen.”