to Congress: 'Sky is not falling'
Say global warming alarmism unproven, energy taxes crippling
Posted: July 01, 2009
8:06 pm Eastern
By Bob Unruh
© 2009 WorldNetDaily
A team of scientists with years of
expertise in climate issues has written an open letter to Congress asserting
the "sky is not falling" and there is no evidence man is causing
The letter was signed by physics
professors Robert H. Austin and William Happer of Princeton, environmental
sciences professor S. Fred Singer of the University of Virginia, retired
manager for strategic planning at ExxonMobil Roger Cohen, physics professor
(emeritus) Harold W. Lewis at UC-Santa Barbara and others.
Their names are tied to long lists
of initials, including APS, or the American Physical Society; AAAS, or the
American Association for the Advancement of Science; and AGU, or the American
At issue is the pending
"cap-and-trade" tax increase in Congress that would impose not only
restrictions on the use of energy, but also taxes on that use. It narrowly was
passed in the U.S. House but faces some hurdles in the Senate.
The letter is being publicized at the Climate Depot website, along with others:
It addresses a recent letter from
the Woods Hole Research Center that demanded quick action by Congress to
"avoid global disaster."
"The letter purports to be from
independent scientists, but that center is the former den of the president's
science adviser, John Holdren, and is far from independent," the new
"This is the same science
adviser who has given us predictions of 'almost certain' thermonuclear war or
eco-catastrophe by the year 2000, and many other forecasts of doom that somehow
never seem to arrive on time."
The new letter said the facts are
"The sky is not falling; the Earth has been cooling for 10 years, without help. The present cooling was NOT predicted by the alarmists' computer models, and has come as an embarrassment to them.
"The finest meteorologists in
the world cannot predict the weather two weeks in advance, let alone the
climate for the rest of the century. Can Al Gore? Can John Holdren? We are
flooded with claims that the evidence is clear, that the debate is closed, that
we must act immediately, etc, but in fact THERE IS NO SUCH EVIDENCE; IT DOESN'T
The legislation would, however,
"cripple the U.S. economy, putting us at a disadvantage compared to our
competitors," the scientists warned.
"For such drastic action, it is
only prudent to demand genuine proof that it is needed, not guesswork, and not
false claims about the state of the science," they wrote.
Finally, they wrote, "climate
alarmism pays well."
"Many alarmists are profiting
from their activism. There are billions of dollars floating around for the
taking, and being taken," the letter said.
The Woods Hole letter had contended,
"New information arrives daily to confirm what many specialists have known
for three decades: human-caused climatic disruption is serious, moving rapidly,
and gaining momentum with every delay in correcting the trend."
The Austin letter, however, said
such instances of "consensus" simply are not proof.
Others signing the new letter were
physics professor Laurence Gould of University of Hartford and meteorology
professor Richard Lindzen of MIT.
Their diagnosis of the climate issue largely agreed with Alan Carlin, the senior
operations research analyst at the EPA's National Center for Environmental
Carlin submitted his research on the
agency's greenhouse gases endangerment findings and offered a fundamental
critique on the EPA's approach to combating CO2 emissions. But officials
refused to share his conclusion in an open internal discussion, claiming his
research would have "a very negative impact on our office."
Instead, his study was barred from
circulation within the EPA and was never disclosed to the public for political
reasons, according to the Competitive Enterprise
Institute (http://cei.org/), or CEI, a
group that has accessed four internal e-mails on the subject.
CEI General Counsel Sam Kazman told
WND, "His boss basically told him, 'No, I'm not going to send your study
further up. It's going to stay within this bureau.'"
A March 12 e-mail to Carlin warned
him not to have "any direct communication with anyone outside NCEE on
Carlin, a researcher who earned his
doctorate in economics from Massachusetts Institute of Technology and an
undergraduate degree in physics from California Institute of Technology,
informed officials that two-thirds of his references were from peer-reviewed
publications and defended his inclusion of new research on the topic.
"It is also my view that the
critical attribute of good science is its correspondence to observable data
rather than where it appears in the technical literature," he wrote.
"I believe my comments are valid, significant and contain references to
significant new research … They are significant because they present
information critical to justification (or lack thereof) for the proposed
[greenhouse gas] endangerment finding."
WND also has
reported on the Petition Project (http://www.petitionproject.org),
which has compiled the signatures of more than 31,000 scientists, including
some 9,000 Ph.D.s, who flatly reject the "global warming" agenda