What does the best evidence now tell us? That man-made global warming is a mere hypothesis that has been inflated by both exaggeration and downright malfeasance, fueled by the awarding of fat grants and salaries to any scientist who'll produce the "right" results. The warming "scientific" community, the Climategate emails reveal, is a tight clique of like-minded scientists and bureaucrats who give each other jobs, publish each other's papers -- and conspire to shut out any point of view that threatens to derail their gravy train. Such behavior is perhaps to be expected from politicians and government functionaries. From scientists, it's a travesty. Matt Patterson in Meltdown of the Climate "consensus"

In the past decade, the overall trend of temperatures has been not upwards, but down.

In other words, as a growing army of genuine experts across the world has been trying to tell us, there is not a single item on the list of apocalyptic predictions we have been fed for so long by the IPCC and the likes of Al Gore which is not being called into question by what is actually happening to the world's climate.

The devastating book which debunks climate change by Christopher Booker, Daily Mail

See also:

Wall Street Journal - Climate Emails Stoke Debate (evidence of supressed dissensus)

For Messerschmidt er det vigtigt at gøre opmærksom på, at klimadiskussionen ikke er præget af total konsensus blandt forskerne, som det ellers ofte fremstilles i medierne.

Konferencen som Dansk Folkeparti arrangerer i samarbejde med deres Europaparlamentsgruppe Gruppen for Europæisk Frihed og Demokrati, finder sted den sjette december.

http://www.180grader.dk/nyheder/Dansk_Folkepartis_alternative_klimatopm_de_tager_form.php

One cause of the blunders that have made the Met Office a laughing stock is less widely appreciated, however. It is that the multi-million pound computer it uses to assist its short-term forecasting for Britain is also one of the four main official sources of data used by the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to predict global warming. In this respect the IPCC's computer models have proved just as wrong in predicting global temperatures as the Met Office has been in forecasting those mild winters and heatwave summers [in the UK].

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/5955955/Weather-records-are-a-state-secret.html

In April, the Polish Academy of Sciences published a document challenging man-made global warming. In the Czech Republic, where President Vaclav Klaus remains a leading skeptic, today only 11% of the population believes humans play a role. In France, President Nicolas Sarkozy wants to tap Claude Allegre to lead the country's new ministry of industry and innovation. Twenty years ago Mr. Allegre was among the first to trill about man-made global warming, but the geochemist has since recanted. New Zealand last year elected a new government, which immediately suspended the country's weeks-old cap-and-trade program.

The number of skeptics, far from shrinking, is swelling. Oklahoma Sen. Jim Inhofe now counts more than 700 scientists who disagree with the U.N. -- 13 times the number who authored the U.N.'s 2007 climate summary for policymakers. Joanne Simpson, the world's first woman to receive a Ph.D. in meteorology, expressed relief upon her retirement last year that she was finally free to speak "frankly" of her nonbelief. Dr. Kiminori Itoh, a Japanese environmental physical chemist who contributed to a U.N. climate report, dubs man-made warming "the worst scientific scandal in history." Norway's Ivar Giaever, Nobel Prize winner for physics, decries it as the "new religion." A group of 54 noted physicists, led by Princeton's Will Happer, is demanding the American Physical Society revise its position that the science is settled. (Both Nature and Science magazines have refused to run the physicists' open letter.)

From: The Climate Change Climate Change
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124597505076157449.html
by Kimberly Strassel

Seen on: Time to re-engage debate on global warming science
http://www.cfact.org/a/1545/Time-to-reengage-debate-on-global-warming-science

Mr. Gore,

On March 14, 2007 Lord Monckton of Brenchley challenged you to debate your position on global warming, but your refusal only strengthens their position. We urge you to debate Lord Monckton of Brenchley, or otherwise admit that the causal link between man and global warming is spurious.

More at:

http://www.petitiononline.com/agdgw/petition.html

http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/

http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/monckton_papers/

Lord Monckton on Youtube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7W-BePJOLbw

[Professor Ole] Humlum peger, som mange andre, også på at temperaturen faktisk ikke er steget de sidste ti år, på trods af at IPCC-modellerne klart forudsiger en stigning på 0,2-0,3 grader. Nu er ti år sandsynligvis ikke nok til at kunne sige noget som helst fornuftigt om en langsigtstrend, ikke mindst fordi 1998 var et såkaldt ’El Niño år’, men nordmanden gør opmærksom på, at IPCC selv har brugt det usædvanligt varme år som ’bevis’ for at opvarmningen er menneskeskabt. Og som han udtaler til Weekendavisen: ”Hvis ti års temperaturstigning fra 1978 til 1988 var nok til at overbevise om rigtigheden af at oprette IPCC med den erklærede opgave at undersøge specielt den menneskelige påvirkning af klimaet, og hvis ti års temperaturstigning frem til 1998 er usædvanlig og et mere end 90 procent sikkert bevis på menneskeskabt global opvarmning, som det er blevet hævdet af IPCC, så har de efterfølgende otte-ni års stagnation i temperaturen vel også relevans?”

Mere hos Punitokraterne

December 20th 2007: Over 400 prominent scientists from more than two dozen countries recently voiced significant objections to major aspects of the so-called "consensus" on man-made global warming. These scientists, many of whom are current and former participants in the UN IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), criticized the climate claims made by the UN IPCC and former Vice President Al Gore. - The new report issued by the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee’s office of the GOP Ranking Member details the views of the scientists, the overwhelming majority of whom spoke out in 2007. - Read more in Over 400 Prominent Scientists Disputed Man-Made Global Warming Claims in 2007- Senate Report Debunks "Consensus".

See also The Washington Times: Scientists doubt climate change.

"The media may scream that “the science is in” and the “debate is over,” but in fact it continues vigorously, with credentialed climate scientists on both side of the divide". - Det siger ABC News’ tv-vært John Stossel i kommentaren - Don't Look to Government to Cool the Planet .

- I artiklen giver Stossel eksempler på hvorfor og hvordan, debatten om klimaforandringer og global opvarmning trives i bedste velgående. Han nævner også problemer forbundet med FN's klimapanel IPCC. Han påpeger derudover problemer forbundet med, hvad man aktuelt gør for at imødegå det angivelige problem. Til slut i sin kommentar lover han, at han i næste uge vil fortælle, hvad den private sektor burde gøre.

Et medlem af FN's klimapanel (IPCC) siden dets oprettelse, Dr. Vincent Gray opfordrer til, at klimapanelet nedlægges. Opfordringen sker i forbindelse med et svar til en kollega, der foreslog, at man reviderede panelet og dets arbejdsmetoder. Imidlertid nævner Gray flere grunde til, at en revidering ikke kan anses som tilstrækkelig, hvis man ønsker at genetablere klimavidenskabens omdømme.

Gray nævner i en længere redegørelse brugen af målinger og data i IPCC, som der ifølge ham, ikke er videnskabelig basis for at anvende i praksis. Han skriver, at man groft har manipuleret med de data, der omfatter mængden af CO2 i atmosfæren. I Grays brev til hans kollega finder man endvidere udtalelser, der vidner om at "den globale opvarmning" ifølge Gray er et ganske overdrevet fænomen, og at man, hvis man benyttede sig af mere redelige data, aktuelt må forvente at opdage, at opvarmningen ikke er eksisterende.

Gray afslutter sit brev således:

Jeg begyndte så småt at forstå, at tærsklen [for anstændig videnskab] var blevet overtrådt, da jeg så [tv-dokumentaren] "The Great Global Warming Swindle". Ja, vi er nødt til at se det i øjnene. Hele processen har været en form for svindel. IPCC har fra begyndelsen fået [politisk] licens til at bruge en hvilken som helst metode, der blev anset for nødvendig, til at skaffe "bevis" på, at en øget mængde CO2 var skadelig for klimaet; selv om dette omfattede manipulation af tvivlsomme former for data, samt brugen af "den offentlige mening" frem for videnskab til at "bevise" deres påstand.

IPCC's forsvinden under æreløshedens emblem vil ikke blot være ønskværdigt, men uundgåeligt. Årsagen er, at verden lidt efter lidt vil opdage at de "forudsigelser, der udgik fra IPCC simpelthen ikke går i opfyldelse. Fraværet af nogen "global opvarmning" de seneste otte år er kun begyndelsen. Før eller senere vil vi alle komme til at indse, at denne organisation samt tankegangen, som den bygger på, er forloren. Desværre må man forvente alvorlige negative økonomiske konsekvenser forårsaget af panelets arbejde, før denne realisering gør sig gældende. [egen oversættelse] Kilde.