Alan Carlin, a PhD and seasoned veteran at the EPA may become a folk hero to climate change skeptics, but he may also lose his job. At least according to an interview this morning on Fox news, he was grateful that he still had a job. A report he submitted back in March had called to question many points of the Global Warming Theory based on current data. The internal e-mails were leaked out, perhaps in response to the recent passing of the high taxing climate change bill. I recently wrote an article that highlighted four points of climate change skeptics. Many more were raised by this paper. According to Carlin and his co authors:
Global temperatures have actually declined in the last 11 years, despite increases in CO2.
Increased tropical storm activity has repeatedly been cited as a sign of anthropogenic global warming and yet that has not occurred.
The IPCC in its reports has claimed that Greenland would shed its ice and that has not happened at all.
Recent studies have concluded that the Global Climate Models used by the IPCC are faulty and “not supported by empirical evidence.”
Studies also suggest the IPCC dismissed the effect of solar variability based on faulty data and new research shows that “up to 68% of the increase in Earth’s global temperatures” could be caused by solar variability.
Analysis of surface stations that monitor temperatures has shown that most fail to meet the most basic meteorological guidelines for proper sighting resulted in inaccurate measurements. The “Urban Heat Island” effect is considered key to this.
Satellite temperature measurements taken from 1978 to 2008 do not show an increased rate of warming over the 30 year period.
Are politics blocking science on this issue? Carlin suggested that old science is being used for current policies, and the ideas are out of date. New evidence has backed a growing number of outspoken scientists on the skeptics side. This is new science with limited recorded data. Computer models have been wrong in their expectations up until now, so what about the next few decades? I support less pollution and renewable energy, but not at the cost of deceiving the public.
Tony Pann, Examiner.com, 6.30.2009
