Scientists Send Letter to UN: Give Up Futile Climate Change Battle

Photo of Noel Sheppard.

If a former vice president with absolutely no formal scientific training in climatology or meteorology makes a statement about the world coming to an end due to rising temperatures, media will fawn over him like teenyboppers in the presence of Elvis Presley.

Yet, if more than 100 scientists from around the world send a letter to the Secretary General of the United Nations urging him and his organization to stop wasting time, resources, and money fighting a futile climate change battle, crickets will be heard in newsrooms around the country.

Pretty disgraceful, wouldn't you agree?

Yet, such was the case when scientists from around the planet signed their names to the following letter sent to Ban Ki-moon Thursday as nations were meeting in Bali to discuss preposterous and economically damaging ideas to address global warming:

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

Dec. 13, 2007

His Excellency Ban Ki-Moon

Secretary-General, United Nations

New York, N.Y.

Dear Mr. Secretary-General,

Re: UN climate conference taking the World in entirely the wrong direction

It is not possible to stop climate change, a natural phenomenon that has affected humanity through the ages. Geological, archaeological, oral and written histories all attest to the dramatic challenges posed to past societies from unanticipated changes in temperature, precipitation, winds and other climatic variables. We therefore need to equip nations to become resilient to the full range of these natural phenomena by promoting economic growth and wealth generation.

The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has issued increasingly alarming conclusions about the climatic influences of human-produced carbon dioxide (CO2), a non-polluting gas that is essential to plant photosynthesis. While we understand the evidence that has led them to view CO2 emissions as harmful, the IPCC's conclusions are quite inadequate as justification for implementing policies that will markedly diminish future prosperity. In particular, it is not established that it is possible to significantly alter global climate through cuts in human greenhouse gas emissions. On top of which, because attempts to cut emissions will slow development, the current UN approach of CO2 reduction is likely to increase human suffering from future climate change rather than to decrease it.

The IPCC Summaries for Policy Makers are the most widely read IPCC reports amongst politicians and non-scientists and are the basis for most climate change policy formulation. Yet these Summaries are prepared by a relatively small core writing team with the final drafts approved line-by-line by ­government ­representatives. The great ­majority of IPCC contributors and ­reviewers, and the tens of thousands of other scientists who are qualified to comment on these matters, are not involved in the preparation of these documents. The summaries therefore cannot properly be represented as a consensus view among experts.

Contrary to the impression left by the IPCC Summary reports:

  • Recent observations of phenomena such as glacial retreats, sea-level rise and the migration of temperature-sensitive species are not evidence for abnormal climate change, for none of these changes has been shown to lie outside the bounds of known natural variability.
  • The average rate of warming of 0.1 to 0. 2 degrees Celsius per decade recorded by satellites during the late 20th century falls within known natural rates of warming and cooling over the last 10,000 years.
  • Leading scientists, including some senior IPCC representatives, acknowledge that today's computer models cannot predict climate. Consistent with this, and despite computer projections of temperature rises, there has been no net global warming since 1998. That the current temperature plateau follows a late 20th-century period of warming is consistent with the continuation today of natural multi-decadal or millennial climate cycling.

In stark contrast to the often repeated assertion that the science of climate change is "settled," significant new peer-reviewed research has cast even more doubt on the hypothesis of dangerous human-caused global warming. But because IPCC working groups were generally instructed (see http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/docs/wg1_timetable_2006-08-14.pdf) to consider work published only through May, 2005, these important findings are not included in their reports; i.e., the IPCC assessment reports are already materially outdated.

The UN climate conference in Bali has been planned to take the world along a path of severe CO2 restrictions, ignoring the lessons apparent from the failure of the Kyoto Protocol, the chaotic nature of the European CO2 trading market, and the ineffectiveness of other costly initiatives to curb greenhouse gas emissions. Balanced cost/benefit analyses provide no support for the introduction of global measures to cap and reduce energy consumption for the purpose of restricting CO2 emissions. Furthermore, it is irrational to apply the "precautionary principle" because many scientists recognize that both climatic coolings and warmings are realistic possibilities over the medium-term future.

The current UN focus on "fighting climate change," as illustrated in the Nov. 27 UN Development Programme's Human Development Report, is distracting governments from adapting to the threat of inevitable natural climate changes, whatever forms they may take. National and international planning for such changes is needed, with a focus on helping our most vulnerable citizens adapt to conditions that lie ahead. Attempts to prevent global climate change from occurring are ultimately futile, and constitute a tragic misallocation of resources that would be better spent on humanity's real and pressing problems.

Yours faithfully,

[List of signatories]

Please click on the list of signatories to see all who signed that which media choose to ignore to further their own agenda.

—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters.


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Not shocked

And here comes the 'Professor' to tell us how this letter and it's authors are all a big fraud and the consensus is in.

D

Keep the ILLEGALS out, join NumbersUSA to send free faxes to your reps.

PT

You can bet on that.PT will continue to support Al Gores green campaign.Which is to put more green in Al's wallet with the GW scam.

I like to keep it simple. So

I like to keep it simple. So many people with confusing letters after their names. I don't see any scientists from Slomenia on the list, so I'll just keep listening to the cattle rancher and internet entrepreneur from Tennessee.

Bought and Paid For

Don't forget the "bought and paid for by the oil industry" line. That's a favorite of Bill Blakemore of ABC

Lancasters, You are

Lancasters,

You are kidding, right?

The Lancaster was an amazing

The Lancaster was an amazing plane. Kudos on your historical moniker reference to its part in Hitler's downfall!

Check out my exclusive edit of BBC News America's interview with Mrs Clinton: It's news to me!

I know this is a little off-topic but...

How come no one asks the Dem Presedential candidates what they are doing during this election cycle to run a more carbon neutral campaign?  (It's not a GOP issue, so there's no reason to ask them, right?)

Dennis could say...

"I saved money and fuel by having my Iowa campaign use a home-office." Oops!

And better yet, Fox News this AM was apparently unable to discover a rented Iowa office of any sort for Alan Keyes. Good thing these totally fair arbiters of who should & shouldn't be in a "debate" always use one standard. (From my partisan-Libertarian days, I have long experience with this particular area of sarcasm-targets!)
JMR

Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul. (All purpose anti-slander-link, sadly-needed these days...)

Violation

It violates the rules of softball that the Dems debates have been.That would be a good question.

Can I see a "show of hands"

Can I see a "show of hands" who thinks that the Carbon Neutrality is a bunch of bull?  (We now know Thompson would raise his hand- thought that was great)

Another pig at the trough

It appears that "His Excellency" Ban Ki -moon is a recent graduate from the Al Gore school of hypocrisy. After stating last week that climate change is the "moral challenge of our generation," and "failure to act could send the human race into oblivion" it was anounced that after leaving Bali he and his entourage will travel 4300 miles out of their way to attend a music concert. The 100 scientists may as well be talking to a lamp post!

We're DOOMED, I tell you!

Holy icicle, Batman... I just looked at the numbers and we've actually been COOLING since 1998.  I threw together a global climate model in Excel, made a few dozen wild assumptions, and can now absolutely predict that Mother Earth's temperature is gonna drop faster than Bill Clinton's trousers at an intern convention.  My estimate is that by 2035, the polar ice caps are going to contain all the water on earth, and it will be possible to walk from the USA to Yurrup.  My computer model suggests that the temperature in Arizona in 2035 will be about absolute zero, with the rest of the country being cooler than that.

The only hope we have left is that we can produce enough CO2 to offset this impending disaster.  I'm doing my part, running in place while I type this.  I've also ordered a new Hummer and am in the market for a house that burns as much energy as Al Gore's.  And they say that methane produced by farm animals is a tremendously effective greenhouse gas, so it's beans for breakfast, lunch and dinner.

I have reviewed your climate model..

...And agree 100%!!

That means we have a 'consensus' and should immediately go on the road with 'our' findings! We're gonna be rich!!!

Carbon credits be damned! We're gonna sell carbon popsicles!

"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...

Wanna guess why the meeting

Wanna guess why the meeting was held in Bali? 

Rush Limbaugh stated that of the top 5 Republicans running for the presidency, only one was a true conservative. http://www.fred08.com/ 

hmmm

For the mixed drinks and dirty looks of the natives laughing at the kaffiers?  or was it to see how agw is turning the equator region into a steamroom? Wasen't it already hot there????

"When you can't make them see the light, make them feel the heat"         R. Reagan

MARS/ALGORE/IDIOT

Hey AL:  Please explain how the Republicans are responsible for polar warming on MARS!!!!!! AS for co2 sources here on earth please shut up already that should cut man made sources in half. In addition it would relieve the ice creme headach that you are giving us all. 

Fat chance

the UN's going to let this go. There's money in the air now, billions of it, if they can get this new shakedown working. When their NYC building is iced in in August, maybe then they'll back down.

Help... In the past two

Help...

In the past two days or so, I caught a glimpse of an article talking about how magma under Greenland is causing it's ice to melt (or something to that effect). Can anyone here lead me in the right direction? I can't find it (scratching head). 

Rush Limbaugh stated that of the top 5 Republicans running for the presidency, only one was a true conservative. http://www.fred08.com/ 

greenland magma and ice melt

CT, here's a source for you:

EARTH'S HEAT ADDS TO CLIMATE CHANGE TO MELT GREENLAND ICE
http://researchnews....

wizard...

Thank you. 

Rush Limbaugh stated that of the top 5 Republicans running for the presidency, only one was a true conservative. http://www.fred08.com/ 

An added note on the

An added note on the scientists that sent that letter. They are now or were members of the IPCC.

I am waiting for the media to report the global tax the UN is proposing. The US will be taxed the most. They wish to rais 10 to 40 billion $ a year. Who belives the UN will spend "all" of that on new technology in undeveloped countries? Who belives they will split it up between UN diplomat bank accounts?

Just as a side note, we have friends of the earth supporting a global warming tax:

“A climate change response must have at its heart a redistribution of wealth and resources,” said Emma Brindal, a climate justice campaigner coordinator for Friends of the Earth.

When will any of this be reported by the MSM?

Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!

A LInk

Do you have a link to Emma Brindal's statement? It would be nice to have it readily at hand for when the twue beliewers come a-calling. Thanks.

Just my $0.02

Here y'are:

From the horse's mouth, middle paragraph.

(apologies to horses) Note, by the way, that it's all the capitalists' fault.

And how much of that $40

And how much of that $40 bill will end up in the hands of terrorist regimes??......

 

Controlling carbon is a bureaucrat's dream. If you control carbon, you control life," Richard Lindzen - March 2007.

People are making the wrong arguments

Climate change, global warming, and all the baggage that goes with it is a circular argument. The argument people should be making is: there is nothing the U.N., or any other powerful body, can do  about it except insure they survive by conning everyone else. I have yet to figure out why their survival is so important <em>I</em> should sacrifice to insure it happens.

Bring up the U.N.'s track record when they ask for trillions of dollars to be syphoned off to poor countries. Point out the amount of money that would actually reach any one person within those countries versus what would go toward administrative costs, bribes to corrupt government officials, money syphoned off getting around trade embargos to develop weapons for nonpeaceful means which will in turn create more CO2 emissions rather than lessen them. Ask the U.N. how giving them trillions of dollars will cap the carbon emissions of volcanoes, wildfires, earthquakes, and tsunamis.

And finally, ask them why anyone should listen to them when their credibility on any issue has been blown to bits from the absolutely corrupt way the organization is run.

And if they sputter and complain that all of that is beside the point or they are offended, tell them that makes us even then since they offended you long ago after which you can tell them to answer the blankedy questions.

 

Oh, for those who are talking in terms of billions in taxes... when you put it altogether it will cost trillions. Mark my words.

I went to the link...wow is

I went to the link...wow is all I can say. I sent the link to my friend who has bought into this lie, hook, line and sinker. I probably won't get a response from her. She doesn't actually want to know the truth, she is invested in the myth.

"She doesn't actually want

"She doesn't actually want to know the truth, she is invested in the myth."

And that, my friends, is the real "inconvenient truth". Well done, msh. You cut right to the point.

ckc1227, Is 12/27 you

ckc1227,

Is 12/27 you birthdate, just curious? Thanks for the compliment, sometimes I do get it right. :)

Yeah, that's my birthday. I

Yeah, that's my birthday. I was Christmas baby, one gift my parents couldn't take back, no matter how much they may have wanted.

Cash is acceptable by the way. ;)

ckc1227, Let me be the

ckc1227,

Let me be the first to say, "Happy Birthday". My daughter's is 12/9 and my husband's is 1/9...they both feel cheated. LOL!

Consensus? What consensus?

“Yet these summaries are prepared by a relatively small core writing team with the final drafts approved line-by-line by government representatives”.

  Government representatives that I’m sure don’t have our best interest in mind. This is global wealth redistribution and nothing more. They are so full of it to keep calling GW a consensus when it’s obviously not. Wrong or right it’s not a consensus.

What would happen if a bunch of free market conservatives declared that the liberal hold on our education system is destroying our ability to compete. Say they give very compelling scientific evidence (wouldn’t be hard). And then a “small core writing team” declares it a consensus and if you disagree, you will be labeled a bad, bad person. FEAR THE LABEL!

Sometimes I think all of western civilization suffers from Stockholm syndrome.

 

Noel, it get's better, not

Noel, it get's better, not only won't the MSM report on the letter, an UN NGO person threatened to have scientists arrested for speaking out at Bali !!!!! Talk about suppression of dissent!  These loons have just tipped their hand as to their dictatorial tendencies.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=prnw.20071213.DC09846&show_article=1  originally sourced from icecap/us

Hanlon's Razor: Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity. dscott's corollary: The line between malice and stupidity is called depraved indifference.

Don't you know that dissent

Don't you know that dissent is not allowed and not appropriate if it is directed against liberals, Marxists, Commies or liberal-socialist agendas?

If science were on their

If science were on their side there would be no need for these strong on tactics. Just let the science play out.

Obviously they're running scared and forcing their dogma. 

IPCC needs to be abolished.

"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT

I lost half my friends and

I lost half my friends and relatives by forwading info about John Kerry.  I'll lose the rest of them for sending them this article.

The Bodie Specter - "I'd rather be hit with Dick Cheney's shot than with Bill Clinton's wad"

Proffessor Spoof

Where is the prof? The extra F is for you professor.

Sorry, not very subtle.

We may all want to open up a carbon credit trading company soon. Why not? It seems inevitable that the kook fringe will get what it wants through scare tactics and government enforced intervention.

Sigh....

PAP

Pickaxe,

May I ask, did your screen name come from an old, OLD, Odyssey video game??  I believe the system was made by Radio Shack....(?)

"Controlling carbon is a bureaucrat's dream. If you control carbon, you control life," Richard Lindzen - March 2007.

the silent ones

After reading this letter through yesterday I wondered how many scientists would have liked to have added their names but were afraid of repercussions such as losing their funding or their jobs, or being shunned liked some kind of village outcast.

These are very prominent scientists that did dare challenge the AGW hysterics.

Unpersons

And Gore said, 'Thou shalt
not commit blasphemy against the Global Warming God.' The blasphemer sets his
will above Gore's law, tramples the commandment of Gore. The inquisition shall
begin (cut off funds for grants) and the transgressors shall be cast out
(become an unperson*, never able to get funds again, possibility of tenure
removal…obsolete people).

*unperson - Person that has been
erased from existence by the government for breaking the law in some way. A unperson
is completely erased from history. All records of their existence is removed
from record, and all party members are expected to removed them from memory. To
mention their name is considered thoughtcrime. This eliminates any
possibility of martyrdom.

Disband Dems and repay us!!

All the waste of time and money and resources spent on global warming bullshit. Gore should be arrested and his assets seized along with Democrats for this horrible hoax. Then there's illegal immigration -- another anti-U.S. debacle bankrolled by Democrats using our money. Sell the fancy DNC HQ and take all the party's money and repay hard-working Americans ... and levy huge fines on the media for being so unethical and Democratic (a redundacy).

I see that Professor Truth

I see that Professor Truth has nothing to say about this.

Well, at least he could post another link to realclimate.

LOL

I sure he will.

Ironic isn't it

The sense of irony here is electric. The U.N. is trying to do to the World what the Democrats are trying to do to the U.S.. Fleece the rich to subsidize the poorer and the country with the bullseye on its back is the U.S. for both senarios.  So when the Democrats start to realize that the U.N. is trying to muscle in on their perceived piece of pie will they start balking at the "man-made Global Warming" alarm because that is their money to spend and once they start backing away from an agenda of wealth redistribution will that not destroy their party's plank.  Just wondering.

"The Marines I have seen around the world have the cleanest bodies, the filthiest minds, the highest morale, and the lowest morals of any group of animals I have ever seen. Thank God for the United States Marine Corps!" ..............Eleanor Roosevelt, 1945.

I just wanted to make a

I just wanted to make a correction. It should read to fleece the poor and middle class of richer countries to give the money to the rich in poor countries. And rich countries.

Example Al Gore. How much money has he made off this? How much money will the alternative energy people make off this. GE?

Meanwhile the truely poor in the poor nations will starve because they can't afford to buy corn that will go into fuel for Gore's and Hollywoods private jets. 

"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT