I am reminded of 1999 when out of 3,100 registered voters in Area F, 2,470 (78 per cent) signed a petition rejecting the RDN-written OCP and 29 (one per cent) signed letters of support. The 29 then claimed the opponents were just a noisy minority. Recent letter writer Dick Stainsby claims there is minimal scientific opposition to the IPCC theories.
There is an army of scientists and engineers who do not believe the ever more strident declarations of the IPCC. At last count there were 31,487 (9,028 with PhDs including many Nobel prize winners) with relevant scientific/technical knowledge who have signed a rejection of the IPCC’s CO2 claims. The IPCC is not a scientific organization. It was set up for a political purpose (to provide reasons to support UN Agenda 21 and Carbon capping and trading). The IPCC terms of reference excludes any consideration of natural causes of global warming. This has been changed to “climate change.” The IPCC has 4,000 employees of whom relatively few have any scientific or climate credentials. Most of the conclusions in their repetitious reports are lifted from environmental advocacy organizations.
The global press gives massive attention to the proclamations of the IPCC and seems to have imposed a blackout on any mention of contradictory evidence. Even Barrack Obama seems to be hooked.
The real, actual (meaning not “adjusted”) globally-measured data and the actual physics of atmospheric components don’t match the claims of the IPCC, in fact the claims about CO2 are effectively impossible. The nail in the IPCC CO2 coffin came in 2011 when a major experiment at CERN confirmed the Svensmark mechanism whereby the sun overwhelmingly controls the climate of the Planet. The CERN scientists were immediately gagged by IPCC interests. Made Stephen Harper look like an amateur.