MIT Climate Scientist Dr. Richard Lindzen Mocks 97% Consensus: 'It Is Propaganda'By Marc MoranoClimate Depot Feb. 17, 2016 |
Ohio Senate Passes Bill Aimed at Outlawing Criticism of Israel, Criminalizing Gospel
Putin Accuses 'Ethnic Jews' of Tearing Russian Orthodox Church Apart
Nick Fuentes Targeted by Gunman at His Home After Being Doxed on Elon Musk's Twitter [UPDATED]
IDF Opens Fire on Syrians Protesting Israel's Expanding Occupation of South Syria
'Saudi National' Rams Car Into Germans at Christmas Market in Suspected Terrorist Attack [UPDATED]
97 Consensus? Dr. Lindzen: 'They never really tell you what they agree on. It is propaganda. So all scientists agree it's probably warmer now than it was at the end of the Little Ice Age. Almost all Scientists agree that if you add CO2 you will have some warming. Maybe very little warming. But it is propaganda to translate that into it is dangerous and we must reduce co2 etc. If you can make an ambiguous remark and you have people who will amplify it 'they said it not me' and he response of the political system is to increase your funding, what's not to like?' Dr. Richard Lindzen, atmospheric physicist, MIT professor emeritus, and lead author of the "Physical Climate Processes and Feedbacks" chapter of the 2001 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report, attributes climate hype to politics, money, and propaganda. Lindzen particularly takes issue with the "97% consensus" claim that is being used to stifle debate and demonize skeptics. MIT Climate Scientist Dr. Richard Lindzen, an emeritus Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at the Department of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences at MIT: RealClearRadioHour: Question: How much warming do you expect for a doubling of carbon dioxide? Lindzen: "Doubling is chosen for a very good reason. The dependence of the greenhouse gas effects what is called logarithmic. Which means if you double CO2 from 280 to 560ppm, you would get the same thing you as you would get from doubling from 560 to 10120. It's a diminishing return thing." "There is no obvious trend for at least 18 years in temperature." Lindzen on '97% consensus': Lindzen: "It was the narrative from the beginning. In 1998, [NASA's James] Hansen made some vague remarks. Newsweek ran a cover that says all scientists agree. Now they never really tell you what they agree on. It is propaganda." "So all scientists agree it's probably warmer now than it was at the end of the Little Ice Age. Almost all Scientists agree that if you add CO2 you will have some warming. Maybe very little warming. But it is propaganda to translate that into it is dangerous and we must reduce CO2 etc. If you can make an ambiguous remark and you have people who will amplify it 'they said it not me' and he response of the political system is to increase your funding, what's not to like? If I look through my department, at least half of them keep mum. Just keep on doing your work, trying to figure out how it works. MIT 'has just announced that they see this bringing in $300 million bucks. It will support all sorts of things.' Read More |