Note: I’ve been aware of this effort being underway for sometime, and I’m happy to be able to report it today. The fact that the Chinese undertook the effort speaks volumes. – Anthony
Here is the Heartland press release from their website:
The Chinese Academy of Sciences in June 2013 translated and published a Chinese edition of Climate Change Reconsidered and Climate Change Reconsidered: 2011 Interim Report, two hefty volumes containing more than 1,200 pages of peer-reviewed data on climate change originally published by The Heartland Institute in 2009 and 2011.
The two books present a sweeping rebuttal of the findings of the United Nations’ controversial Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), whose reports were widely cited as the basis for taking action to stop or slow the advance of climate change. More recently, the IPCC has been surrounded by controversy over lapses in its quality control and editorial bias.
The Chinese Academy of Sciences is the world’s largest academy of sciences, employing some 50,000 people and hosting more than 350 international conferences a year. Membership in the Academy represents the highest level of national honor for Chinese scientists. The Nature Publishing Index in May ranked the Chinese Academy of Sciences No. 12 on its list of the “Global Top 100” scientific institutions – ahead of the University of Oxford (No. 14), Yale University (No. 16), and the California Institute of Technology (No. 25).
The first 856-page volume of Climate Change Reconsidered, published in 2009, and its follow-up, the 430-page Climate Change Reconsidered: 2011 Interim Report,were produced by a team of scientists originally convened by Dr. S. Fred Singer under the name of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC). The volumes were coauthored and edited by three climate science researchers:
- Craig D. Idso, Ph.D., chairman of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, editor of the online magazine CO2 Science, and author of several books and scholarly articles on the effects of carbon dioxide on plant and animal life;
- Robert M. Carter, Ph.D., a marine geologist and research professor at James Cook University in Queensland, Australia and author of Climate: the Counter Consensus; and
- S. Fred Singer, Ph.D., founder and president of the Science and Environmental Policy Project (SEPP) and a distinguished atmospheric physicist and first director of the U.S. Weather Satellite Service.
All three men will be in Beijing for the Chinese Academy of Sciences event on June 15, 2013 to speak about the translation of Climate Change Reconsidered. Scores of additional scientists, economists, and policy experts reviewed and contributed to the volumes.
Here is what Breitbart had to say about it:
Breitbart News can exclusively report on Tuesday night that the Chinese Academy of Sciences has translated and published a Chinese edition of two massive climate change volumes originally published by The Heartland Institute in 2009 and 2011.
The volumes, Climate Change Reconsidered and Climate Change Reconsidered: 2011 Interim Report, are chock full of 1,200 pages of peer-reviewed data concerning the veracity of anthropogenic climate change. Together, they represent the most comprehensive rebuttal of the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change findings, which have been the basis of the climate change legislation movement across the planet.
The Chinese Academy of Sciences is set to present the publication on June 15 at a major ceremony in Beijing. The Academy employs approximately 50,000 people and hosts 350 international conferences each year, and is one of the most prestigious scientific academies in the world, ranked ahead of every Ivy League school save Harvard
Jim Lakely, director of communications at the Heartland Institute, told Breitbart News, “Translating and publishing nearly 1,300 pages of peer-reviewed scientific literature from English to Chinese is no small task, and indicative of how important CAS considers Climate Change Reconsidered to the global climate change debate. That CAS has invited the authors and editors of Climate Change Reconsidered to a conference this Saturday in Beijing to introduce the studies is yet another indicator of how important it is to get this information out to a wider audience.”
Apropos of this post:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-06-12/tougher-regulations-seen-from-obama-change-in-carbon-cost.html
The “social cost of carbon.” Arrrrgh.
This means that the AGW “consensus” of world climate scientists is now down to 3%!
That’s 1,354,040,000 people exposed to the alternative view. Great.
Excellent news. I have a tendency to see other issues stand out above the main issue being presented, though.
“The Nature Publishing Index in May ranked the Chinese Academy of Sciences No. 12 on its list of the “Global Top 100” scientific institutions – ahead of the University of Oxford (No. 14), Yale University (No. 16)(GP: and the other ivy league, except Harvard) , and the California Institute of Technology (No. 25).”
I have been harping a bit on the decline of University scholarship in the West as personified by the shoddy science of climate science, but it isn’t the only area. I’m shocked that such as CIT, a once prolific generator of science has sunk to a lower level and I even fear that it will get worse before it gets better. I consider myself better educated as an old engineer than the thousands of metric tonnes of PhD’s and their supervisors who have apparently abandoned the methods of science and taken up a political science form. Oh dear, the mess that has to be cleared up after the collapse. The only solace I can muster here is it was ranked by the plummeting Nature rag. How dare this fallen organization have anything to say about excellence in science. But they aren’t wrong this time.
Excellent news, indeed!!!! I have read both the original reports & they were excellent, full of rational logical argument.
Maybe India will get on board & reject Pachauri’s pandering.
I think Peter Gleik’s head exploded. /sarc
Great news – and congratulations to the authors of the report, as well as to The Heartland Institute. So refreshing to see an internationally-respected scientific Academy treat such ‘counter consensus’ climate research with the same respect and open-mindedness so noticeably lacking (if not entirely absent) from western scientific organisations.
Malicious gossip might have it that the Chinsese have a special interest in that kind of stuff as they are globally exposed to be one of the biggest “polluters”.
As for me I’ll take it as another great step for unequivocal clarification about what’s really going on.
Kudos!
What chance the UN persuading China to take action on reducing CO&8322; now?
I made a # of that.
Who knew that China was being funded by the Koch brothers? 🙂
Reminds of this movie:
To John Tillman (above),
India abandoned the IPCC three years ago on an official basis and follows its won advisory board (they are too smart to do otherwise).
Bruce
The Commies are happy to foment internal discord within their greatest rival. Tread with caution.
Since they accepted help fro the Chinese the Heartland Institute is clearly in the pocket of both communism and big government which strangely puts them more towards the mainstream within the climate community.
James at 48 says:
June 12, 2013 at 10:39 am
“The Commies are happy to foment internal discord within their greatest rival. Tread with caution.”
You mean we should all unite under the warmist banner against the evil ChiComs and do what? Oh, I see, buy solar panels from them to run circles around their stagnating economy, yeah, I see how that’ll work… /sarc
Their mega nation, run by engineers rather than culture war lawyers who nearly invoke civil wars, threatens to fertilize the whole planet that we will soon be overrun by vines.
Wow, I can’t wait to hear the reaction from the Team and all their hangers on. Someone’s going to have to start a RealClimate in Chinese.
Now all they need to do is invite Professor Murry Salby to present a lecture and its game over for the ‘team’.
That comes from Damian Carrington of the Guardian.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/damian-carrington-blog/2012/may/02/climate-change-sceptic-right-wing
He said that sort of thing a lot.
But I guess he can’t anymore…
I’ve heard that the following statement, or something similar to it, was attributed to Deng Xiaoping: ‘It doesn’t matter if it’s a black cat or a white cat, if it kills mice, it’s a good cat.’
That statement seems similar to this piece of wisdom: ‘Pick your friends where you find them.’
For some reason the foregoing statements seem to apply here.
Excellent !!!
A Billion more people exposed to rational science can’t be bad!
MtK
Hmmm. On the one hand, they love coal, and are none too keen on the IPCC trying to tell them what to do. On the other, their solar industry is huge. Hard to say what their motives are, but all in all, it seems like good news.
Who cares what their motives are, if it benefits humanity – and hopefully it will throw a monkey wrench into der Fuehrer’s idiotic and destructive plans. And hopefully the Chinese will take this to the UN and tell Obersturmfuehrer Kerry to shove it.
Wonderful news, withal.