You are on page 1of 7

Climate Change(Neg) Matthew Hamilton, Eveready

___________________________________________________________________________________________

Climate Change(Neg)
Table of Contents
1. Funding..................................................................................................................................................1
1.1 $100 billion Wasted to “Encourage” Initiative in Other Countries.................................................1
1.2 IPCC Spent $100 Billion For MMGW Link...................................................................................1
2. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change........................................................................................2
2.1 IPCC Reform Wanted......................................................................................................................2
2.2 A Few IPCC Flaws..........................................................................................................................2
2.3 IPCC Has Bad History....................................................................................................................3
2.4 Last IPCC Report Could Have Mistakes.........................................................................................3
2.5 Various Recent IPCC Flaws............................................................................................................3
3. Priority...................................................................................................................................................4
3.1 Fix GW Falls in Priorities List........................................................................................................4
3.2 Public Priorities List........................................................................................................................4
4. Professor Phil Jones...............................................................................................................................5
4.1 Phil Jones “Lost” Crucial Evidence................................................................................................5
4.2 “Lost” is a Poor Excuse...................................................................................................................6
4.3 Medieval Warm Period in Northern Hemisphere............................................................................6
5. Science and Public Policy Institute Report............................................................................................6
5.1 15 Years Without Statistically-Significant Warming.......................................................................7
5.2 Ocean is Cooling.............................................................................................................................7
5.3 Should-be Radiation Escaping Into Space......................................................................................7
5.4 SPPI Report.....................................................................................................................................7

1. Funding

1.1 $100 billion Wasted to “Encourage” Initiative in Other Countries


“Unter: Obama's egotism runs high”, the News Star.com, December 20, 2009,
http://www.thenewsstar.com/article/20091220/OPINION02/912200325

So the U.S. is going to give upwards of $10 billion a year for 10 years to a global fund to "encourage"
other countries to lower their carbon dioxide emissions to "combat" global warming. Sure, uh huh, as if
that's exactly where that money is going to go. The naivete of the man is dangerous.

1.2 IPCC Spent $100 Billion For MMGW Link


Jennifer Macey, “Calls for IPCC reform after more mistakes”, the World Today, February 8, 2010,
http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2010/s2813112.htm [Brackets added]

1 of 7
Climate Change(Neg) Matthew Hamilton, Eveready
___________________________________________________________________________________________

BOB CARTER[a marine geologist from james cook university in Queensland]: the question is not are
carbon dioxide emissions causing warming, the question is how much warming are they causing or
more specifically how much are the human emissions, how much warming are the human emissions
causing.

The IPCC and their scientists have now had 20 years. They have spent somewhere around $100 billion,
thousands of scientists worldwide working on trying to pin down that human signal. They haven't
found it after 20 years.

2. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

2.1 IPCC Reform Wanted


Jennifer Macey, “Calls for IPCC reform after more mistakes”, the World Today, February 8, 2010,
http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2010/s2813112.htm

ELEANOR HALL: A prominent climate change scientist has joined sceptics in calling for the UN
authority on climate change to be reformed, as yet more flaws are exposed in the IPCC's reports.

The Telegraph newspaper in Britain reports that several of the claims made by the International Panel
on Climate Change are based on information from Masters students or from environmental or business
lobby groups.

While climate scientists say these flaws don't undermine the core argument about global warming,
some are now calling for changes in the international climate change body. But one Australian IPCC
scientist says reform would be pointless.

2.2 A Few IPCC Flaws


Jennifer Macey, “Calls for IPCC reform after more mistakes”, the World Today, February 8, 2010,
http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2010/s2813112.htm

JENNIFER MACEY: The IPCC has recently admitted that it was wrong about the rate of glacial melt
in the Himalayas. Now a British newspaper has uncovered more mistakes.

The London Telegraph reports that potential of wave power to produce electricity was wrongly
attributed to a British wave energy company, Wavegen. The company says it was not the source of the
information.

There are also reports that Masters students' papers on the effect of climate change in the Nile delta and
other African coastal areas were included in the report. Sceptics have seized on the mistakes.

2 of 7
Climate Change(Neg) Matthew Hamilton, Eveready
___________________________________________________________________________________________

2.3 IPCC Has Bad History


Jennifer Macey, “Calls for IPCC reform after more mistakes”, the World Today, February 8, 2010,
http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2010/s2813112.htm [Brackets added]

[According to]BOB CARTER[a marine geologist from james cook university in Queensland]: Ever
since 1995 there has been a string of scandals involving the IPCC. They are all of the same sort but the
science they are doing is not high class or they are trying to manipulate the refereeing procedure or in
some cases, they alter reports after the scientists have signed off on them.

So the perplexing thing about this from the point of view of an independent scientist like me is why the
press has suddenly picked this up as a big story because it is a very old story.

2.4 Last IPCC Report Could Have Mistakes


Jennifer Macey, “Calls for IPCC reform after more mistakes”, the World Today, February 8, 2010,
http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2010/s2813112.htm

JENNIFER MACEY: The last IPCC report took three years to write. There were 451 lead authors, 818
contributing authors, 2000 reviewers, multiple drafts and 90,000 comments.

Professor Neville Nicholls from Monash University is a lead author of the IPCC and was involved in
writing the section on the physical science of climate change. He says it's inevitable that some glitches
will slip in.

2.5 Various Recent IPCC Flaws


Richard Grey, Ben Leach, “New errors in IPCC climate change report”, Telegraph.co.uk, British
newspaper, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/7177230/New-errors-in-
IPCC-climate-change-report.html

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) report is supposed to be the world’s most
authoritative scientific account of the scale of global warming.

But this paper has discovered a series of new flaws in it including:

The publication of inaccurate data on the potential of wave power to produce electricity around the
world, which was wrongly attributed to the website of a commercial wave-energy company.

Claims based on information in press releases and newsletters.

New examples of statements based on student dissertations, two of which were unpublished.

More claims which were based on reports produced by environmental pressure groups.

3 of 7
Climate Change(Neg) Matthew Hamilton, Eveready
___________________________________________________________________________________________

They are the latest in a series of damaging revelations about the IPCC’s most recent report, published in
2007.

Last month, the panel was forced to issue a humiliating retraction after it emerged statements about the
melting of Himalayan glaciers were inaccurate.

3. Priority

3.1 Fix GW Falls in Priorities List


“Public's Priorities for 2010: Economy, Jobs, Terrorism”, the Pew Research Center For the People &
the Press, January 25, 2010, http://people-press.org/report/584/policy-priorities-2010%20last
%20month

Dealing with global warming ranks at the bottom of the public’s list of priorities; just 28% consider this
a top priority, the lowest measure for any issue tested in the survey. Since 2007, when the item was first
included on the priorities list, dealing with global warming has consistently ranked at or near the
bottom. Even so, the percentage that now says addressing global warming should be a top priority has
fallen 10 points from 2007, when 38% considered it a top priority. Such a low ranking is driven in part
by indifference among Republicans: just 11% consider global warming a top priority, compared with
43% of Democrats and 25% of independents.

3.2 Public Priorities List


“Public's Priorities for 2010: Economy, Jobs, Terrorism”, the Pew Research Center For the People &
the Press, January 25, 2010, http://people-press.org/report/584/policy-priorities-2010%20last
%20month

4 of 7
Climate Change(Neg) Matthew Hamilton, Eveready
___________________________________________________________________________________________

4. Professor Phil Jones

4.1 Phil Jones “Lost” Crucial Evidence


Jonathan Petre, “Climategate U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has been no global
warming since 1995”, Mail Online, February 14, 2010, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-
1250872/Climategate-U-turn-Astonishment-scientist-centre-global-warming-email-row-admits-data-
organised.html

The academic at the centre of the ‘Climategate’ affair, whose raw data is crucial to the theory of climate
change, has admitted that he has trouble ‘keeping track’ of the information.
Colleagues say that the reason Professor Phil Jones has refused Freedom of Information requests is that
he may have actually lost the relevant papers.
Professor Jones told the BBC yesterday there was truth in the observations of colleagues that he lacked
organisational skills, that his office was swamped with piles of paper and that his record keeping is ‘not
as good as it should be’.
The data is crucial to the famous ‘hockey stick graph’ used by climate change advocates to support the
theory.

Impact:Why/How do you lose data like that? As the evidence states it is “crucial”.

5 of 7
Climate Change(Neg) Matthew Hamilton, Eveready
___________________________________________________________________________________________

4.2 “Lost” is a Poor Excuse


Jonathan Petre, “Climategate U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has been no global
warming since 1995”, Mail Online, February 14, 2010, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-
1250872/Climategate-U-turn-Astonishment-scientist-centre-global-warming-email-row-admits-data-
organised.html

But Dr Benny Pieser, director of the sceptical Global Warming Policy Foundation, said Professor
Jones’s ‘excuses’ for his failure to share data were hollow as he had shared it with colleagues and
‘mates’.

4.3 Medieval Warm Period in Northern Hemisphere


Jonathan Petre, “Climategate U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has been no global
warming since 1995”, Mail Online, February 14, 2010, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-
1250872/Climategate-U-turn-Astonishment-scientist-centre-global-warming-email-row-admits-data-
organised.html

Sceptics believe there is strong evidence that the world was warmer between about 800 and 1300 AD
than now because of evidence of high temperatures in northern countries.
But climate change advocates have dismissed this as false or only applying to the northern part of the
world.
Professor Jones departed from this consensus when he said: ‘There is much debate over whether the
Medieval Warm Period was global in extent or not. The MWP is most clearly expressed in parts of
North America, the North Atlantic and Europe and parts of Asia.”

Impact: The reason they can say this about the northern hemisphere is because they have found records
there from the civilizations of that time. The reason they only say this about the northern hemisphere
and not the southern, is because the people in the southern hemisphere didn't have a written language,
and therefore, did not keep records. To think that it was only in one half of the hemisphere and not the
other, would be like imagining there was some sort of wall keeping the temperature out.

4.4 Professor Phil Jones:


The director of University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit. who is famous among the scientific
community for refining the instrument temperature record, also played a significant role in the 2001
IPCC Third Assessment Report Summary for Policymakers.

5. Science and Public Policy Institute Report

6 of 7
Climate Change(Neg) Matthew Hamilton, Eveready
___________________________________________________________________________________________

5.1 15 Years Without Statistically-Significant Warming


Christopher Monckton, Editor, “SPPI Monthly CO2 Report”, Science and Public Policy Institute,
Volume 1 Issue 7, July 2009,
http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/originals/co2_report_july_09.pdf [Brackets
added]

The global surface temperature record, which we[SPPI] update and publish every month, has shown no
statistically-significant “global warming” for almost 15 years. Statistically-significant global cooling
has now persisted for very nearly eight years. Even a strong el Nino – expected in the coming months –
will be unlikely to reverse the cooling trend.

5.2 Ocean is Cooling


Christopher Monckton, Editor, “SPPI Monthly CO2 Report”, Science and Public Policy Institute,
Volume 1 Issue 7, July 2009,
http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/originals/co2_report_july_09.pdf

More significantly, the ARGO bathythermographs deployed throughout the world’s oceans since 2003
show that the top 400 fathoms of the oceans, where it is agreed between all parties that at least 80% of
all heat caused by manmade “global warming” must accumulate, have been cooling over the past six
years. That nowprolonged ocean cooling is fatal to the “official” theory that “global warming” will
happen on anything other than a minute scale.

5.3 Should-be Radiation Escaping Into Space


Christopher Monckton, Editor, “SPPI Monthly CO2 Report”, Science and Public Policy Institute,
Volume 1 Issue 7, July 2009,
http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/originals/co2_report_july_09.pdf

Observed reality is entirely different from what 11 of the UN’s models predict. Instead of 6 F warming
in response to a doubling of atmospheric CO2 concentration, only 1 F can be expected, because nearly
all the radiation that should be trapped in the atmosphere is escaping to space. The scare is truly over.

5.4 SPPI Report


SPPI’s authoritative Monthly CO2 Report for July 2009 announces the publication of a major paper by
Professor Richard Lindzen of MIT, demonstrating by direct measurement that outgoing long-wave
radiation is escaping to space far faster than the UN predicts, showing that the UN has exaggerated
global warming 6-fold.

7 of 7