This video features David Archibald presenting his data on global warming. Below, after the video, is more on his data, and how the Aerospace Forum Asia handled Archibald’s science at the end of a speech he gave in Hong Kong – where the conference was designed to:
…persuade the airline industry to cut back on its production of so-called greenhouse gases…
A scientist, David Archibald, – make that a “solar” scientist – told attendees of a Hong Kong environmental conference to “figure out ways of increasing CO2 output….Carbon dioxide is not even a little bit bad – it’s wholly beneficial.”
At the Hong Kong “Greener Skies 2008” confab,
One observer at the February conference said there would have been fewer jaws dropping had Archibald stripped off his clothes before the assembled.
At the end of Archibald’s speech the President, of Aerospace Forum Asia, took the microphone and asked:
How can you be right and 2,000 scientists wrong?
I am happy to share the science. It’s all reputable.
Read this story at WorldNetDaily, where you can download Archibald’s report The Past and Future of Climate – Rehabilitating Carbon Dioxide, presented in Melbourn, Australia in June 2007.
Before you run-off to WorldNetDaily though, consider this (and there’s much more out there):
From the U.S. Senate Committee on Environmental Public Works, Oct. 2007:
One of the most decorated French geophysicists has converted from a believer in manmade catastrophic global warming to a climate skeptic.
This latest defector from the global warming camp caps a year in which numerous scientific studies have bolstered the claims of climate skeptics. Scientific studies that debunk the dire predictions of human-caused global warming have continued to accumulate and many believe the new science is shattering the media-promoted scientific “consensus” on climate alarmism.
The above quote moves to this sub-heading: 60 Scientists Debunk Global Warming Fears. The names of those scientists are here.
Free Republic’s Over 500 Scientists Have Published Evidence Countering Man-Made Global Warming Fears cites a Hudson Institute study:
A new analysis of peer-reviewed literature reveals that more than 500 scientists have published evidence refuting at least one element of current man-made global warming scares.
More than 300 of the scientists found evidence that
1) a natural moderate 1,500-year climate cycle has produced more than a dozen global warmings similar to ours since the last Ice Age and/or that
2) our Modern Warming is linked strongly to variations in the sun’s irradiance.
This data and the list of scientists make a mockery of recent claims that a scientific consensus blames humans as the primary cause of global temperature increases since 1850,” said Hudson Institute Senior Fellow Dennis Avery…
Despite being published in such journals such as Science, Nature and Geophysical Review Letters, these scientists have gotten little media attention. “Not all of these researchers would describe themselves as global warming skeptics,” said Avery, “but the evidence in their studies is there for all to see….
We have had a Greenhouse Theory with no evidence to support it-except a moderate warming turned into a scare by computer models whose results have never been verified with real-world events,” said co-author Singer. On the other hand, we have compelling evidence of a real-world climate cycle averaging 1470 years (plus or minus 500) running through the last million years of history. The climate cycle has above all been moderate, and the trees, bears, birds, and humans have quietly adapted.”
The names were compiled by Avery and climate physicist S. Fred Singer, the co-authors of the new book Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1,500 Years, mainly from the peer-reviewed studies cited in their book. The researchers’ specialties include tree rings, sea levels, stalagmites, lichens, pollen, plankton, insects, public health, Chinese history and astrophysics.
(Note: Maggie’s Notebook publishes the above without changing text, or order of the text, from the original but I have delineated the spacing a bit for focus, and skipped over a couple of paragraphs which do not change the meaning of the text.)
Archibald is also cited at SolarScience:
It’s worth pointing out that even NASA is having second thoughts about this, as I pointed out earlier.
A paper by David C. Archibald published in Energy and Environment in 2006 forecasted a low intensity solar cycle with a peak Ri of approximately 50. A few scientist have even claimed that we might be headed into another Solar Minimum. For the past few months, the actual sunspot numbers have been below NOAA’s lower predicted threshold, approaching zero.
And they have continued to be near zero.
Others talking about the science from David Archibald:
Right Truth – Carbon dioxide is not even a little bit bad – it’s wholly beneficial.”
Errors in IPCC Climate Science
Trackback URL for this entry:
Tracked by Right Truth – Carbon dioxide is not even a little bit bad – it’s wholly beneficial.”
Excerpt: A scientist, David Archibald, – make that a “solar” scientist – told attendees of a Hong Kong environmental conference to “figure out ways of increasing CO2 output….Carbon dioxide is not even a little bit bad – it’s wholly beneficial.” The