Global warming skeptics send letter to Congress urging members not give into climate ‘alarmists’

In response to a letter sent to members of Congress at the end of January, encouraging them to ignore global warming skeptics and “take a fresh look at climate change,” global warming skeptics sent their own letter to members Tuesday telling them not to be intimidated by claims of a “scientific consensus.”

The letter, signed or endorsed by more than 50 scientists, tells members that the signees completely disagree with the assertions made by their alarmist peers.

“The eighteen climate alarmists (as we refer to them, not derogatorily, but simply because they view themselves as ‘sounding the alarm’ about so many things climatic) state that the people of the world ‘need to prepare for massive flooding from the extreme storms of the sort being experienced with increasing frequency,’ as well as the ‘direct health impacts from heat waves’ and ‘climate-sensitive infectious diseases,’ among a number of other devastating phenomena,” the letter reads. “It is the eighteen climate alarmists who appear to be unaware of ‘what is happening to our planet’s climate,’ as well as the vast amount of research that has produced that knowledge.”

The letter points to two reports — “Carbon Dioxide and Earth’s Future: Pursuing the Prudent Path” and the 2009 report of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), “Climate Change Reconsidered” — as an argument for why global warming is not the apocalyptic catastrophe alarmists would have everyone believe.

“In light of the profusion of actual observations of the workings of the real world showing little or no negative effects of the modest warming of the second half of the twentieth century, and indeed growing evidence of positive effects, we find it incomprehensible that the eighteen climate alarmists could suggest something so far removed from the truth as their claim that no research results have produced any evidence that challenges their view of what is happening to Earth’s climate and weather,” the skeptics write, urging members to indeed look at the evidence and come to the correct conclusion.

  • baal

    Environmentalism is a political product. One way to test this theory is to ask an environmentalist if they support switching from coal to nuclear. Do it, it’s fun and you’ll get to see their true motivation.

  • grimacebearit

    Hey “Genious” One of the signees happens to be Dr. Easterbrook. He’s forgotten more about “global warming” than you’ll ever know. He did an analysis of the GISP2 Greenland ice core and guess what? 2010 was warm, but that still means 9,098 out of the last 10,500 years were still warmer. Temperatures have been going up since the planet has emerged from the mini ice age(1860’s) but we haven’t come close to the temperatures of the Minoan, Roman or Medieval warmings. Global warming alarmists have created a very nice cottage industry for themselves. They will say and do anything to protect it.

  • Pingback: Today’s Most Popular Stories 2.9.11 - FishbowlDC

  • RonitaM

    AGW believers give us blizzards of words daily.
    Stuff about Al Gore and other snow jobs blowing across America.
    Though those flakes fly mightily, I still don’t get their drift.
    Maybe they’re suggesting that Chicago’s next mayor will be Rahm Emanuel because he’ll succeed in bunch quitting away from federal dictates, and showcase how because carbon dioxide levels were much higher yesterday
    (when man wasn’t honking around) than today, no one is to blame him each time that hell freezes over?

  • wagnert in atlanta

    You’ve probably already seen this story:
    The UN announced that 2010 tied for hottest year ever with 2005 and 1998.
    This is taken as evidence that global warming continues. Instead, it’s proof that the world has gotten no hotter in thirteen years (1998-2010 inclusive). I can think of only one factor that distinguishes those years from previous ones — the climate controversy. The global-warming hoohah got rolling about 1998. Obviously, arguing over climate stabilizes global temperatures. Scream on, friends — your fury can save the planet.

  • gooners

    Heh. The letter actually affirms that the world is warming, the climate is changing, and that it is probably being caused by human activity. The disagreement is on the long term effects. But of course it doesn’t take much to get Daily Caller’s merry band of dolts riled up.

    • clw

      Gooners… the black hole of the Caller… infinitely dense.

      • gooners

        Heh. Stupid leftist reading the thing in front of him and understanding it…

        • clw

          Clearly NOT, because you are completely blinded by your bias and ideology, and are completely beholden to the far left on every talking point that you repeat. SOME liberals posters on this website have actual dialogue and give and take on the issues, some can even meet us half-way. They have open minds.

          Not Gooners…

          • gooners

            Give and take on…what the letter says? Is that up to debate? Can you point out the part of the letter that says the earth isn’t warming, and the warming isn’t being caused by increased CO2?

  • Jungle Jack

    I agree with the skeptics, call it Global Warming or Climate Change, man can’t really affect the world climate. We also can’t prevent a globally disastrous meteor impact.

    However, one catastophic impact on the quality of life on Earth we can control: Over-population. Unless something is done to decrease the birth-rate and/or increase the death-rate, there isn’t going to be enough room for everyone to enjoy a life with quality, or just a life!

    Let’s be realistic, the Human Race isn’t going to colonize any planet other than Earth. Sorry, Trekkies! At present, no planet has been found that is “Earth-like”, despite the best efforts of Astronomers.

    Where are we going to go? Our future seems to be well described by the movie “Soylent Green”.

    • thephranc

      You can fit every human in the world in the state of Texas and have room left over. We are no where near over population. And wont be for many generations.

      • Free Willy

        Where does the food come from?

        • baal

          He’s not actually proposing that we relocate everyone to texas…

          • Free Willy

            My comment was more in regards to this,

            “We are no where near over population”

            Perhaps I should have pointed out the stupidity of the Texas comment as well but I thought it best to leave it out.

            Anyway the major issues with population is food, with every day more land being rendered unsuitable for food production due to both salinity (or others chemical issues) and forfeiture to ethanol production (something that will only increase) I don’t see the world being able to produce a large amount more food.

            “population expected to reach between 7.5 and 10.5 billion in the year 2050″

            Most of these people will want to live the life of say the average American, a car for each adult, a big house, modern apllicanes, heated/cooled housing, etc etc.
            So for the reasons above energy use will increase and along with that so with
            that so will food consumption.

            The world can simply not support that.

            Its not strategically smart to bank on technology being able to sort these issues out.

            To me the jury is out on global warming but I think over population is a very real concern.

          • thephranc

            Willy you are stupid. There is nothing stupid about stating the fact that you can fit the worlds population in the state of Texas with room to spare. Its a visual to understand just how few people there actually are. You don’t see the world producing enough food because you are an ignorant fool who doesn’t understand much of anything. There is enough arable land in the world to feed the population 100 times more than what it is easily. You obviously don’t grasp just how much produced food is wasted in a day. And how could you, you aren’t smart enough. You also don’t know what the average American wants or has. They don’t have big houses and a car for every adult.

            Willy I wish you and the other liberal trolls would at the very least try using facts and logic and reasoning when you try to argue points. You are all so ignorant and dishonest.

          • Free Willy

            “there is enough arable land in the world to feed the population 100 times more than what it is easily.”

            What did you mean by this?

            Surely you are not saying the earth could support almost 3/4 of a Trillion people?????
            (3/4Trill = 6.9Bil * 100easily)

            If you are going to “try using facts and logic and reasoning when you try to argue points” I shall look forward to seeing them.

            But I know you shall fail yet again.

            But your comment of “They don’t have big houses and a car for every adult.”

            America has “780 vehicles per 1,000 population”
            “US has vastly more cars per 1,000 people than any other major nation.”
            That’s about 1 per adult I would say.

            “Australia has overtaken the US, laying claim to the world’s biggest new homes.”
            The West Australia.

            Building the 2nd biggest in the world I would say that means you can call them big. I don’t undrestand how you can honestly think that on an international standard American homes would not be considered “big”.

            While I wait for your never to arrive proof and sources I shall think about the importance of the fact you can fit 11 people into my lift at work.

        • thephranc

          From the store via the farm.