50 Top NASA Astronauts, Scientists & Engineers in a Global Warming revolt.
|
|
|||||
|
40 votes
|
|
89% | ||
|
2 votes
|
|
4% | ||
|
3 votes
|
|
7% | ||
Here's the letter:
March 28, 2012
The Honorable Charles Bolden, Jr.
NASA Administrator
NASA Headquarters
Washington, D.C. 20546-0001
Dear Charlie,
We, the undersigned, respectfully request that NASA and the Goddard
Institute for Space Studies (GISS) refrain from including unproven
remarks in public releases and websites. We believe the claims by NASA
and GISS, that man-made carbon dioxide is having a catastrophic impact
on global climate change are not substantiated, especially when
considering thousands of years of empirical data. With hundreds of
well-known climate scientists and tens of thousands of other scientists
publicly declaring their disbelief in the catastrophic forecasts, coming
particularly from the GISS leadership, it is clear that the science is
NOT settled.
The unbridled advocacy of CO2 being the major cause of climate change
is unbecoming of NASA’s history of making an objective assessment of
all available scientific data prior to making decisions or public
statements.+As former NASA employees, we feel that NASA’s advocacy of an extreme
position, prior to a thorough study of the possible overwhelming impact
of natural climate drivers
is inappropriate. We request that NASA refrain from including unproven
and unsupported remarks in its future releases and websites on this
subject. At risk is damage to the exemplary reputation of NASA, NASA’s
current or former scientists and employees, and even the reputation of
science itself.
For additional information regarding the science behind our concern, we recommend that you contact Harrison Schmitt or Walter Cunningham, or others they can recommend to you.
Thank you for considering this request.
Sincerely,
(Attached signatures)
CC: Mr. John Grunsfeld, Associate Administrator for Science
CC: Ass Mr. Chris Scolese, Director, Goddard Space Flight Center
Ref: Letter to NASA Administrator Charles Bolden, dated 3-26-12,
regarding a request for NASA to refrain from making unsubstantiated
claims that human produced CO2 is having a catastrophic impact on
climate change.
Read More: http://notrickszone.com/2012/04/10/50-top-astronau...
Top Opinion
-
Annie~Pro American~Pro Israel 2012/04/11 04:30:35Enough is Enough! Stop lying about the Climate Change nonsense.
+8AMEN! Thank you NASA scientists! Thank you for helping us fight those GW con-artists once and for all.
Climate Impact of Increasing Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide - Hansen et al 1981
http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/doc...
Chris de Freitas, Associate Professor, School of Geography, Geology and Environmental Science, University of Auckland said in a 2006 newspaper article: "There is evidence of global warming. ... But warming does not confirm that carbon dioxide is causing it. Climate is always warming or cooling. There are natural variability theories of warming. To support the argument that carbon dioxide is causing it, the evidence would have to distinguish between human-caused and natural warming. This has not been done."
Dr. Roy Spencer, principal research scientist, University of Alabama in Huntsville said in 2008 testimony to a US Senate committee: "I predict that in the coming years, there will be a growing realization among the global warming research community that most of the climate change we have observed is natural, and that mankind’s role is relatively minor".
"To support the argument that carbon dioxide is causing it, the evidence would have to distinguish between human-caused and natural warming."
The point is that we know carbon dioxide causes global warming - it's been known for 150 years - and it will cause that warming regardless of whether it comes from human activity or natural sources. The planet doesn't distinguish between our CO₂ and natural CO₂. So, de Freitas's comment is illogical. See?
Don Easterbrook, emeritus professor of geology, Western Washington University said in a 2006 presentation to the Geological Society of America: "Glaciers advanced from about 1890–1920, retreated rapidly from ~1925 to ~1945, readvanced from ~1945 to ~1977, and have been retreating since the present warm cycle began in 1977. ... Because the warming periods in these oscillations occurred well before atmospheric CO2 began to rise rapidly in the 1940s, they could not have been caused by increased atmospheric CO2, and global warming since 1900 could well have happened without any effect of CO2. If the cycles continue as in the past, the current warm cycle should end soon and global temperatures should cool slightly until about 2035, then warm about 0.5 °C from ~2035 to ~2065, and cool slightly until 2100."
Recent oppositely directed trends in solar climate forcings and the global mean surface air temperature. II.
Mike Lockwood and Claus Fröhlich.
Figure 1: Net human and natural percent contributions to the observed global surface warming over the past 50-65 years according to Tett et al. 2000 (T00, dark blue), Meehl et al. 2004 (M04, red), Stone et al. 2007 (S07, green), Lean and Rind 2008 (LR08, purple), Huber and Knutti 2011 (HK11, light blue), and Gillett et al. 2012 (G12, orange). This has been added to the SkS Climate Graphics Page.
http://www.skepticalscience.c...
Periods of Earth warming and cooling occur in cycles. This is well understood, as is the fact that small-scale cycles of about 40 years exist within larger-scale cycles of 400 years, which in turn exist inside still larger scale cycles of 20,000 years, and so on.
The simulation showed weakening of the AMOC due to the increase in glacial melt beginning about 19,000 years ago, which decreased ocean heat transport, keeping heat in the Southern Hemisphere and cooling the Northern Hemisphere. Other studies suggest this southern warming caused sea ice to retreat and shifted winds around the Southern Ocean, uncorking carbon dioxide that had previously been stored in the deep ocean and venting it to the atmosphere around 17,500 years ago. This rise in carbon dioxide then initiated worldwide warming.
http://climaterealists.com/in...