Concerned Scientists Reply on Global Warming
WSJ:
[...]
In summary, science progresses by testing predictions against real world data obtained from direct observations and rigorous experiments. The stakes in the global-warming debate are much too high to ignore this observational evidence and declare the science settled. Though there are many more scientists who are extremely well qualified and have reached the same conclusions we have, we stress again that science is not a democratic exercise and our conclusions must be based on observational evidence.
The computer-model predictions of alarming global warming have seriously exaggerated the warming by CO2 and have underestimated other causes. Since CO2 is not a pollutant but a substantial benefit to agriculture, and since its warming potential has been greatly exaggerated, it is time for the world to rethink its frenzied pursuit of decarbonization at any cost.
1 Comment
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
-
Archives
- June 2012 (44)
- May 2012 (697)
- April 2012 (624)
- March 2012 (635)
- February 2012 (782)
- January 2012 (672)
- December 2011 (519)
- November 2011 (361)
- October 2011 (539)
- September 2011 (500)
- August 2011 (584)
- July 2011 (523)
-
Categories
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS

Unbelieveably good paragraph.
Comment by Noblesse Oblige | February 23, 2012