A Major Contribution to the Global Warming Debate

Published November 1, 2009

Climate Change Reconsidered: The 2009 Report of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC)
By S. Fred Singer, Ph.D. and Craig Idso, Ph.D.
The Heartland Institute, 2009, 880 pages
ISBN 978-1-934791-28-8

When future historians study the current global mass hysteria about alleged catastrophic, manmade global warming (MMGW), they will most likely shake their heads in total disbelief. Those historians will be able to conclude that in promoting the catastrophic MMGW dogma, basic scientific methods and principles were seriously violated.

IPCC Flaws

The United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) so far has produced four sizeable scientific assessment reports and is already working on the fifth. Although the “Summaries for Policymakers” of each volume have expressed increased belief human greenhouse gas emissions are responsible for global warming, the underlying science has not provided convincing evidence that this is so.

Most of the IPCC’s so-called “evidence” is based on non-validated computer models and shoddy science. Sadly, IPCC has acted more as a manmade-global-warming political advocate than an independent, impartial scientific organization.

One of the most dishonest propaganda ploys used by the IPCC is the assertion there is scientific consensus about catastrophic MMGW. Nothing could be further from the truth. Thousands of scientists reject the IPCC dogma, and many are actively debunking it. Many Web sites, articles, and books have appeared to counter the MMGW hysteria.

Another despicable ploy by MMGW propagandists is to demonize and vilify anyone who dares to criticize their beliefs.

Powerful Rebuttal

In 2003, a group of critical scientists formed the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC) to produce an in-depth reply to the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Their assessment report has now been published by The Heartland Institute, titled Climate Change Reconsidered.

It is an impressive, 880-page tome. It evaluates and discusses the same scientific information as used by the IPCC, plus many more peer-reviewed publications that were ignored by the IPCC because they did not fit their dogma.

Climate Change Reconsidered is a comprehensive, authoritative, and definitive reply to the IPCC reports. Every statement or comment is properly referenced, so anyone can check the original sources for him or herself. The book is subdivided into nine easily readable chapters, covering all areas of climate science relevant to the IPCC dogma. Each chapter can be read as a standalone treatise.

Alarmist Consensus Debunked

The book also has four appendices, the most interesting of which is a list of 31,478 names of American scientists (among them 9,029 Ph.D.s) who signed a petition to the U.S. Congress saying there is no convincing scientific evidence human greenhouse gas emissions are causing or will cause catastrophic global warming.

This petition alone illustrates the mythical nature of the so-called “consensus.”

Climate Change Reconsidered is a major contribution to the global warming debate. It should be required reading for every politician, businessman, and scientist. I highly recommended this book.

Gerrit van der Lingen, Ph.D. ([email protected]) is a geologist and paleoclimatologist living in Christchurch, New Zealand. He is a foundation member of the New Zealand Climate Science Coalition.

For more information …

Climate Change Reconsidered: The 2009 Report of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC): http://www.nipccreport.org