Most leading geologists, throughout the world, know that the IPCC's view of Earth processes are implausible if not impossible.
Despite all the hype and the models and the catastrophic predictions, it seems to me that we human beings barely understand climate. It is too vast a domain. Though satellites have given us a sense of the movement of weather systems across the planet, portrayed every night on television, we still know little about the oceans, ... the atmosphere... [, or the] solar energy and the effect of the sun's magnetic field on Earth, and only a little about the land. The Earth is a big place.
Politician, Consumer Activist
What nuclear lobbies ignore is all the coal and oil that needs to be burned to enrich uranium...
There is of course much more wrong with state-of-the-art global circulation models (climate models) than the assumption and implementation of CO2-H2O feedback. Although these models are among the most elaborate predictive models of complex non-linear phenomena, they are nonetheless sweeping oversimplifications of the global climate system and its mechanistic intricacies.
All naturalistic cosmological theories of origins must invent physics that have never been observed by science -- because the "Big Bang" can't be explained based upon current physics. A naturalistic origin of the universe violates either the First or Second Laws of thermodynamics -- or both. So, is this science? Or faith?
CO2 in the atmosphere and in the ocean reach a stable balance when the oceans contain 50 times as much CO2 as the atmosphere. The IPCC postulates an atmospheric doubling of CO2, meaning that the oceans would need to receive 50 times more CO2 to obtain chemical equilibrium. This total of 51 times the present amount of carbon in atmospheric CO2 exceeds the known reserves of fossil carbon- it represents more carbon than exists in all the coal, gas, and oil that we can exploit anywhere in the world.
It is quite possible that after an ‘adjustment time' the ocean (which contains far more CO2 than the atmosphere) will simply increase its biological activity and absorb the CO2 from the atmosphere.
The Late Ordovician Period [approximately 450 million years ago] was also an Ice Age while at the same time CO2 concentrations then were nearly 12 times higher than today-- 4400 ppm. According to greenhouse theory, Earth should have been exceedingly hot. Instead, global temperatures were no warmer than today. Clearly, other factors besides atmospheric carbon influence earth temperatures and global warming.
There is no atmospheric greenhouse effect, in particular CO2-greenhouse effect, in theoretical physics and engineering thermodynamics. Thus it is illegitimate to deduce predictions which provide a consulting solution for economics and intergovernmental policy.
Head of NIPCC, Astrophysics Professor
The startling element of Bond's results is the close correlation found when the global temperatures and solar-strength records are laid next to each other. ...we know that the linkage exists and is powerful... Computer models indicate that a 0.1 percent change in the sun's radiation could cause a 2 percent change in the Earth's ozone concentration, affecting atmospheric heat and circulation.
CO2 increases may accompany temperature increases rather than causing them. Indeed, some high resolution studies have suggested that the temperature increases precede the CO2 increases. Interestingly, also, ice core data shows strong temporal correlations between inferred temp. and amount of dust preserved in the ice core. Finally, the older geological record shows several dramatic examples of where CO2 concentration and global average temperature were either unrelated or even anti-correlated.
US Politician, Republican
Let’s just go to a fundamental question. Carbon dioxide, Mister Speaker, is a natural byproduct of nature. ... [Yet] carbon dioxide is portrayed as harmful! ... Human activity contributes perhaps three percent of the three percent. In other words, human activity is maybe 3 percent contributing to the 3 percent of carbon dioxide that’s in Earth’s atmosphere. It’s so negligible — it’s a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a percent — that it can hardly be — be quantified.
Inventor of Quantum Healing
...the universe was until rather recently [thought to be] a lifeless collection of particles bouncing against each other, and obeying predetermined rules [of mysterious]... origin. The universe is presented as a watch that somehow wound itself and that, allowing for a degree of quantum randomness, will unwind in a semi-predictable way. But there are many problems with this paradigm - some obvious, others rarely mentioned but just as fundamental. ...the overarching problem involves life...
Inventor of Quantum Healing
How does nature take creative leaps? In the fossil record there are repeated gaps that no "missing link" can fill. The most glaring is the leap by which inorganic molecules turned into DNA. ... If mutations are random, why does the fossil record demonstrate so many positive mutations -- those that lead to new species -- and so few negative ones? ... How can whole systems appear all at once? The leap from reptile to bird is proven by the fossil record ... to our embarrassment....
The climate modelers assume there is no such thing as natural climate variability…at least not on time scales beyond maybe ten years. In effect, they believe that chaos only exists in weather, not in climate. But this view is entirely arbitrary, and there is an abundance of evidence that it is just plain wrong. Chaos occurs on all time scales. Climate change happens, with or without our help.
Leader of the Opposition, Australia
I mean in the end this whole thing is a question of fact, not faith, or it should be a question of fact not faith and we can discover whether the planet is warming or not by measurement. And it seems that notwithstanding the dramatic increases in man made CO2 emissions over the last decade, the world’s warming has stopped.
Like uranium fuel with reprocessing, bomb-making material is separated out, making it vulnerable to theft or diversion. ...the fission of thorium creates long-lived fission products like technetium-99 (half-life over 200,000 years) ...India has been trying to develop a thorium breeder fuel cycle for decades but has not yet done so commercially. U-232 is created ... which has a half-life of about 70 yeras, is extremely radioactive and very dangerous in small quantities.
English Politician, Green Party
[The government is] very successfully pulling the wool over people's eyes over whether or not we need nuclear. The bottom line is there are much greater, safer, quicker, cheaper ways of achieving greater emission cuts than going down the nuclear route. Plus the signal that it gives out internationally is an incredibly negative one.
I am a scientist who was on the carbon gravy train, understands the evidence, was once an alarmist, but am now a skeptic. The whole idea that carbon dioxide is the main cause of the recent global warming is based on a guess that was proved false by empirical evidence during the 1990s... In science, empirical evidence always trumps theory, no matter how much you are in love with the theory.