PAGE 2 — SCIENTIFIC DEBATES AND STUDIES: What You are Not Being Told



Public messaging insists that climate science is unanimous, settled, and beyond dispute. Yet within the scientific literature itself, disagreement is widespread, data is contested, and many foundational claims are actively debated.

This page highlights areas where the science is uncertain, contradictory, or politically filtered before reaching the public.

KEY AREAS OF SCIENTIFIC DISPUTE

  1. Temperature Records: Different datasets show different warming rates. Adjustments, homogenization, and model-based corrections often change historical temperatures in ways the public never sees.

  2. Climate Models: Models routinely overpredict warming. Their projections diverge significantly from observed temperatures, yet they remain the basis for policy.

  3. CO2 Sensitivity: Estimates of climate sensitivity vary widely. Some peer-reviewed studies suggest far lower sensitivity than the IPCC’s preferred range.

  4. Natural Variability: Solar cycles, ocean oscillations, volcanic activity, and long-term natural patterns play a larger role than mainstream narratives acknowledge.

  5. Extreme Weather Claims of increasing hurricanes, droughts, floods, and fires often contradict historical data. Many trends show no significant change.

  6. Polar Ice and Sea Level: Arctic and Antarctic trends are complex and not uniform. Sea-level rise rates differ by region and timeframe.

WHAT THIS PAGE PROVIDES

  • Summaries of peer-reviewed studies that challenge dominant narratives

  • Comparisons between model projections and real-world observations

  • Historical datasets that contradict modern claims

  • Quotes from scientists expressing dissent or caution

  • Links to original research for independent verification

THE PURPOSE Not to deny science, but to show that science is not a monolith. Not to reject evidence, but to examine all of it. Not to silence debate, but to restore it.


__________________________


1100 Papers Support Skeptic Arguments Against Global Warming

1100+ Peer-Reviewed Papers Supporting Skeptic Arguments Against ACC/AGW Alarm





 


September 27, 2013  Former UN IPCC Lead Author Richard Lindzen: “In attributing warming to man, they fail to point out that the warming has been small, and totally consistent with there being nothing to be alarmed about”.

“I think that the latest IPCC report has truly sunk to level of hilarious incoherence.  They are proclaiming increased confidence in their models as the discrepancies between their models and observations increase.” – Dr. Richard Lindzen

“To capture the public imagination, we have to offer up some scary scenarios, make simplified dramatic statements and little mention of any doubts one might have.  Each of us has to decide the right balance between being effective, and being honest.” – Climate scientist Stephen Schneider, interview with Discover magazine, October, 1989

  British environmental expert James Lovelock now admits he was an “alarmist” regarding global warming.  Lovelock previously worked for NASA and became a guru to the environmental movement with his “Gaia” theory of the Earth as a single organism.  In 2007, Time magazine named Lovelock one of its “Heroes of the Environment,” and he won the Geological Society of London’s Wollaston Medal in 2006 for his writings on the Gaia theory.   That year he wrote an article in a British newspaper asserting that  “before this century is over, billions of us will die and the few breeding pairs of people that survive will be in the Arctic where the climate remains tolerable.”  (Independent.co.uk, 16 January 2006)

“We could use up all of the proven oil reserves of oil in the entire world by the end of the next decade.” –  President Jimmy Carter, 1977

“If present trends continue, the world will be … eleven degrees colder by the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us in an ice age.” Kenneth E.F. Watt, in “Earth Day,” 1970.

____________________________

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OwqIy8Ikv-c


 Environmental extremists prevent development, and romanticize peasant life, even as they jet-set around the world.  They are anti-car, anti-growth, anti-U.S.  Communists have moved into the global warming movement because it is anti-capitalism.  Their actions are cruel and oppress the poor in particular. Humans everywhere long for greater prosperity, irrespective of their current condition.  To ask the world’s poorest, who live on an average of $2 per day, to reduce their ecological footprint is hopelessly unfair, unrealistic and unattainable.

“Global warming policies are having a disastrous effect on the world’s poorest people.” – Paul Diesen


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

  PAGE 1 — THE GLOBAL WARMING FRAUD THE GLOBAL WARMING FRAUD A Clear-Eyed Examination of Climate Claims, Politics, and Power For years, the public has been told that “the science is settled,” that debate is over, and that questioning the climate narrative is a moral failing. This site exists for one purpose: to challenge that claim openly, forcefully, and with evidence. Not with slogans. Not with fear. Not with political pressure. But with facts, history, scientific dissent, and critical thinking. This site is not neutral. It is not timid. It is not here to reassure you that the official story is flawless. It is here to expose the cracks. WHAT THIS SITE DOES Examines scientific claims using data, studies, and contradictions rarely shown to the public. Highlights historical parallels where scientific “consensus” was disastrously wrong. Analyzes the economics and incentives behind climate policy. Dissects media narratives and how they shape public perception. Provides curated links a...
Read more
  PAGE 6 — DATA, CHARTS, AND EXTERNAL LINKS DATA, CHARTS, AND EXTERNAL LINKS Evidence You Can Examine for Yourself This page provides the raw material behind the arguments: datasets, charts, studies, and external sources that allow readers to verify claims independently. No interpretations are required. The numbers speak for themselves. Explore the datasets directly. Compare different sources. Look for patterns, contradictions, and long term trends. Verify claims made by media, politicians, and advocacy groups. Form your own conclusions based on evidence, not slogans. THE PURPOSE Not to overwhelm with numbers. Not to cherry pick data. But to provide the raw information that allows readers to think independently and critically.
Read more