I just couldn't let this article in the latest New Yorker article Up in the Air
by Elizabeth Kolbert go by without comment.
Kindly forward this e-mail to Elizabeth Kolbert. Obviously, the attachments to this e-mail are to voluminous for a letter to the Editor, but I sincerely hope that she will read and learn from them.
Here is my letter:
Elizabeth Kolbert, in her "Up In the Air" comment of April 12, 2010, has made an heroic effort to revive the dying theory that human emission of CO2 is causing global warming/climate change. But those of us who know it well and its "living will" to decline heroic measures, feel that the wisest course of action is to let it pass peacefully in the hospice of dying theories.
There is a simple way to tell the difference between scientists and propagandists. If scientists have a theory they carefully search for data that might actually contradict their theory so they can test it further or refine it. The propagandists, on the other hand, select only the data that might agree with their theory and dutifully ignore any data that disagrees with it. How else to explain Ms. Kolbert's argument that "despite what it might have felt like in the Northeast these past few months, globally it was one of the warmest winters on record"? Actually, the global data summarized in www.climate4you.com
show significant world-wide cooling for the past decade. The data also show nothing beyond the normal range of variability in either the polar ice area coverage or in the rate of rise of sea level for the last 20 years.
She asks for a "plausible account of why...scientists...would bother to engineer a climate hoax". The second attachment to this e-mail "Cui Bono From the Hoax" presents such an account, and the infamous "hockey stick" fraud that she fails to mention is the "smoking gun" of the hoax. The "detractor" whose death was greeted by one of the "climategaters" as "cheering news", was the distinguished Australian climatologist, John Daly. He knew the "hockey stick" was a fraud from the day it was published, and said so. That is why his death was referred to as "cheering news. That Daly was right, and that it was a hoax, has now been proven beyond doubt.
The "goofball weathermen" she disparages actually know something about meteorology and the factors that control climate since most of them have actually analyzed weather maps and made real world weather forecasts. She, on the other hand, seems to depend on the anecdotal half truths fed to her by environmental lobbyists or the half-baked IPCC computer models that have already been proven to be wrong. Their predictions of severe global warming over the last decade were worthless, and chasing the phantom of human, CO2-generated global warming is a "fool's errand".
Dr. Martin Hertzberg
Dr. Hertzberg is a combustion research scientist who worked on the prevention of fires and explosions in mines and other industries at the Bureau of Mines in Pittsburgh, PA. He also contributed to our understanding of the fundamental mechanism of combustion in gases and dusts. He currently teaches science and mathematics at various educational institutions, and occasionally consults as an expert on the causes of accidental fires and explosions. He served as a meteorologist in the US Navy and has been studying the global warming issue for the last twenty years.
Dr. Martin Hertzberg: Web Site
Updated PDF downloads by Dr. Martin Hertzberg
(EARTH’S RADIATIVE EQUILIBRIUM IN THE SOLAR IRRADIANCE)
The Climate-Change Hoax II.pdf
("Cui Bono From the Hoax")
The Lynching of Carbon Dioxide.pdf