Thomas Malloy mentions "Unstoppable global warming every 1500 years" (not 1600 years) by Siegfried Fred Singer. The other author of this pop "science" book is Dennis T. Avery. Singer heads the SEPP - Science and Environmental Policy Project. What appear not to remember Thomas is that, in this very forum (while you were reading it) I actually pointed out that on Singer's own website he made directly contradictory statements where he had failed to edit his past opinions to match his current ones (his website has, of course, now considerably changed from then but what is most obvious about its current state is that it is still very stuck in the mid 1990's). Singer is responsible for some of the fallacious claims still used by some deniers. When I pointed out the contradictions they were that originally he had claimed that the measurements of rising temperature were wrong because of the "heat island" effect where the global warming scientists had stupidly forgotten that areas around human population centres, where most measurements are taken, are warmer than average. When this plausible but wrong idea was destroyed (the warming showed up away from population centers too) he then went on to claim that first balloon measurements, then satellite measurements of temperature showed no warming and then that they disagreed with ground based measurements. Again, he was wrong but these ideas continue to resurface, constantly rediscovered by the gullible and the innocent. I must have had a similar argument 100 times with people who have been fooled by this professional contrarian. Avery is at least as bad and continues to promote fallacious ideas and disproved research to fool people. Whether he still believes in what he is saying or is just going though the motions to preserve his pride is anyone's guess...
Thomas wrote:- <<We believe that the sun is putting out more energy, increased solar irradiance>> What has belief got to do with the validity of your position? Either is is or it isn't. Human belief will not change things either way. The sun's output is NOT much increased (the increase over the last 1000 years is tiny and is already taken into account in climate change forecasts and is responsible for AT MOST 20% of the recent warming. Besides, even if your point was correct it would be absolutely insane not to even further reduce human greenhouse gas generation otherwise we would be metaphorically throwing extra petrol on the "natural" fire! Here is a good link which should set you straight http://www.skepticalscience.com/solar-activity-sunspots-global-warming.htm Thomas wrote: <<Have you heard about the letter signed by 100 scientists who don't believe in anthropogenic global warming?>> Of course I have - probably a very long time before you did - you are undoubtedly referring to the "Leipzig declaration". A main element of this was the statement that the satellite temperature record apparently showed no warming. This been definitively invalidated by subsequent research. In other words, it was flat out wrong and much new evidence has accumulated since the petition was launched in 1995 and it has been amended several times since. These "denier" ideas refuse to die because there is always another mug who comes upon them and thinks they have found evidence against the overwhelming scientific consensus position. As my experience is that "faith without logic" people like you may believe any old rubbish as long as it supports what you want to believe you may also like to look up the "Oregon petition", the "Heidelberg declaration" and the "1992 Statement by Atmospheric Scientists on Greenhouse Warming". They will all give you support for your wishful thinking and I feel sure that you will not care that what they claim has been absolutely refuted a hundred ways from Tuesday. A problem is the people who try to understand the whole of the evidence (those who put forward the scientific consensus on global warming) are finding themselves in opposition to people whose expertise is advancing a point of view based on a selection of the evidence such as Avery and Singer. Here is a link that shows a little of the massive disinformation campaign that is still fooling people like Thomas. http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2006/sep/19/ethicalliving.g2 To those who don't already know, the Global warming deniers have links to the campaign of public disinformation instigated by the tobacco industry to rubbish the initial claims that tobacco can cause cancer and recently, that second hand tobacco smoke is a health risk to third parties. Avery and Singer are implicated with this last topic, similarly Lindzen ( perhaps one of the "best" of the sceptics). These people have also tried to deny the damage that ozone destroying chemicals have done. Also, similarly to when I pointed out the inconsistency in Singer's claims about temperature measurement, an environmental journalist George Monbiot spotted this possible blatant lie by Singer... (source http://www.desmogblog.com/node/1478 ) << Then he (Monbiot) found a letter by the UK climate change denier David Bellamy in New Scientist magazine. Bellamy reported that "555 of all the 625 glaciers under observation by the World Glacier Monitoring Service in Zurich have been growing since 1980." This was an interesting - and significant - piece of information. But when Monbiot phoned the World Glacier Monitoring Service, he also found that it was, in their indelicate words: "complete bullshit." Glaciers are retreating around the world. Monbiot chased all over in search of a source for this information. The claim appeared dozens of times in many different locations - but all trails seemed to lead back to the website of the Science and Environmental Policy Project. That's basically Dr. S. Fred Singer's home page. When people challenged Singer, he first lashed out, saying Monbiot "has been smoking something or other." But Singer finally conceded, in March 2005, that the information had originated on his site - posted there by "former SEPP associate Candace Crandall." Singer acknowledged that the information "appears to be incorrect and has been updated." "Updated," however, is different than "corrected." You could still find the claim on his website 18 months later. Singer also failed to mention that the bumbling former associate, Candace Crandall, is his wife.>> As you can see Thomas, it is just not good enough to believe what you want to and so selectively choose sources which at the very least have been proven mistaken, at worst are deliberately lying. I do not expect you to change your views but when someone proves something please try and let it stay proved in your mind and do not let it slip away whenever you hear something new which appears to support your belief structure against logic, evidence and reason. Nick Palmer
