In late September 2010, five “scientists” wrote a turgid and prolix response to four straightforward pages of written scientific and economic testimony that I had submitted in May 2010 to the Congress of the United States, and had presented at an oral hearing, at the request of the ranking minority member of the House Global warming Committee.

The purely political character of what was superficially dressed up as a “scientific” response to my testimony may be gauged from the fact that the five spent many months assembling their tedious and scientifically-regrettable document without having contacted either me or the great majority of the scientific authorities I had cited before they circulated their tract to friendly news media and blog sites. This calculated furtiveness does not betoken honesty.

---

Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites

The inclusion of erroneous and inconsistent material in the section dealing with Himalayan glaciers has highlighted some serious flaws in how the IPCC creates its highly influential assessment reports. Firstly, the IPCC has a procedure for using documents that are both non-published and non-peer-reviewed but none for material published without peer review. Secondly, no members of the author team for each chapter are responsible for checking the work of other authors.

---

Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites

In this report, we provide a review of Illinois’ climate history and show that there is little observational evidence of unusual long-term climate changes taking place that could be linked to anthropogenic “global warming”—despite the frequent prognostications to the contrary, often accompanied by doom and gloom scenarios.

---

Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites

Amid the clamor about the threat of global warming from increasing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, there are several scientific voices with surprising contrary ideas. The evidence is now coming together that there are substantial health benefits from greenhouse gases and these benefits are great enough to reconsider the campaign to cut carbon emissions.

---

Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites

The contradictions and biases evidenced by my communications with Environment America are fascinating. Although they willingly admit that “we do not suggest that these extreme weather events were caused by global warming,” they are willing to assert that: (1) average planetary temperatures continue to increase; (2) the frequency and/or intensity of these events are increasing; and (3) reducing ‘climate changing’ CO2 emissions will protect against these events. I will argue that none of these assertions is true.

---

Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites