A Gathering of “Skeptics”

Posted by Dee Norris

Mark your calendars.

The 2009 International Conference on Climate Change returns to New York City on March 8th, 2009.

The 2009 International Conference on Climate Change will serve as a platform for scientists and policy analysts from around the world who question the theory of man-made climate change. This year’s theme, “Global Warming Crisis: Cancelled,” calls attention to new research findings that contradict the conclusions of the latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report.

Last year’s conference was reported to be a great success and you can access the audio and video recordings of presentations made at the 2008 conference Web site.

Distinguished scholars from the U.S. and around the world have addressed these questions seriously and without institutional bias. Their findings suggest the Modern Warming is moderate and partly or even mostly a natural recovery from the Little Ice Age; that the consequences of moderate warming are positive for humanity and wildlife; that predictions of future warming are wildly unreliable; that the costs of trying to “stop global warming” exceed hypothetical benefits by a factor of 10 or more; and more.

Often, these scholars have been ignored, and often even censored and demonized. They have been labeled “skeptics” and even “global warming deniers,” a mean-spirited attempt to lump them together with Holocaust deniers. The truth of the matter is that these scholars dissent from a false “consensus” put forward by a small but politically powerful clique of government scientists and political allies.

Actual surveys of climate scientists and recent reviews of the scholarly literature both show the so-called “skeptics” may actually be in the majority of the climate science community. They do not lack scholarly credentials or scientific integrity, but a platform from which they can be heard. Their voices have been drowned out by publicity built upon the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, an entity with an agenda to build support for the theory of man-made catastrophic global warming.

This year promises double the attendance as in 2008 and the esteemed Anthony Watts is a confirmed speaker.

I plan on attending.  Do you?

Confirmed Speakers

Name Affiliation
Dennis Avery Hudson Institute
Joseph Bast The Heartland Institute
Robert Bradley Institute for Energy Research
Bob Carter James Cook University (Australia)
Frank Clemente Penn State University
John Coleman KUSI-TV – San Diego
Joseph D’Aleo International Climate and Environmental Change Assessment Project
David Douglass University of Rochester
Myron Ebell Competitive Enterprise Institute
Michelle Foss University of Texas – Center for Energy Economics
Fred Goldberg Royal School of Technology (Sweden)
Laurence Gould University of Hartford
William Gray Colorado State University
Chris Horner Competitive Enterprise Institute
Craig Idso Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change
David Legates University of Delaware
Jay Lehr The Heartland Institute
Marlo Lewis Competitive Enterprise Institute
Richard Lindzen Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Ross McKitrick University of Guelph
Christopher Monckton Science and Public Policy Institute
Jim O’Brien Florida State University
Tim Patterson Carleton University
Benny Peiser Liverpool John Moores University (United Kingdom)
Paul Reiter Institut Pasteur (France)
Arthur Robinson Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine
Joel Schwartz American Enterprise Institute
S. Fred Singer Science and Environmental Policy Project
Fred Smith Competitive Enterprise Institute
Willie Soon Science and Public Policy Project
Roy Spencer University of Alabama at Huntsville
James M. Taylor The Heartland Institute
Anthony Watts Surfacestations.org

Perhaps we can get Al Gore to speak so we are assured of cold weather.


Just an afterthought: As many of you know, Anthony does not receive funding for his work at www.surfacestations.org or here at WUWT.  The funds to attend this conference will most likely come out of his pocket.  Look to your right and you will see at little yellow Donate button under the SHAMELESS PLUG heading.  WUWT gets over 10,000 views a day and if just 0.5% of this traffic contributes ten dollars apiece, we can entirely fund Anthony’s conference expenses.   How about it?   Do we walk the walk or just talk?

Get notified when a new post is published.
Subscribe today!
0 0 votes
Article Rating
285 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Pierre Gosselin
October 25, 2008 3:22 am

Cancelled with one L is American English…
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/cancel
For a comprehensive, highly interesting list of British slang:
http://www.peevish.co.uk/slang/
One quickly observes that the Brits have no shortage of expressions when it comes to dirty words.

John Philip
October 25, 2008 4:26 am

My previous post was in response to a direct question. For the record, I very much endorse the view that we should in general let arguments stand or fall on their own merits and steer clear of ad hominem ‘guilt by association’ or ‘follow the money’ attacks. This applies equally to ‘grant-hungry researchers’ or ‘tools of the oil-industry’.
I should just gives the facts about the $720K that James Hansen allegedly received from George Soros. It never happened. This amount was the total annual funding for the parent organisation of Soros’s Open Society Institute, a philanthropic organisation. Part of the OSI’s budget goes to the Government Accountability Project (surely something libertarians would support?) and part of this group’s activities was a programme to defend whistle blowers and under that programme, Dr Hansen enquired about his legal rights to freedom of speech (after all people have been known to call for his resignation when he branches out into political advocacy) and was offered and accepted some pro bono legal help which amounted to the drafting of one lawyer’s letter. (I know American lawyers can be expensive but …:-).
Hansen received no money from George Soros. Regardless of your opinion of the participants, I don’t think propagating a lie advances the debate one iota.
Hansen’s account and the text of the letter are here and the Soros Foundation annual report is here (see page 123. Warning: large pdf).

anna v
October 25, 2008 4:45 am

I think this smearing according to money resources is nasty and anti science, but one has to be a realist and regret that such a highly colored politically institute is sonsoring what I consider correct science.
Anthony, you have a very large readership, many people do not speak up here, but I am curious whether there are enough of us skeptics out there that we could sponsor a conference without the help of any politically colored institute. I have organized working groups in Greece of over 100 people with the help of a travel agency without too much effort, with just the money from the participants: hotels and a bit extra for organization. Whys is a big institute necessary to organize a good climate conference?
Let me though give you this link http://www.hyperionpowergeneration.com/
where global warming is bread and meat in selling nuclear energy. The law of unexpected consequences.
REPLY: Anna, we could probably arrange a conference, but we might do better as a force for enlightenment. You’ve given me an idea, and I’ll advise shortly – Anthony

Bruce Cobb
October 25, 2008 5:13 am

I see Leif isn’t on the list of speakers. That is too bad, and perhaps partly explains his attitude. Sour grapes. I must say, Leif, your true colors have really shown through on this thread, unfortunately.
Warning: Lets all stop baiting Leif, please. – Dee Norris

Alan the Brit
October 25, 2008 5:31 am

WOW. This site is certainly lively & varied today! Hope I haven’t contributed to any of the volatiliy of it.
FTR. I think Hilter was as found by many of the time, to be very charming, very witty, very intelligent, – & completely mad, becoming criminally insane as his power grew! Hope the site doesn’t veer off track too far to the point of absurdity.
As for the 2nd hand smoking, I believe as John Brignell has stated, the 1st rule of toxicology is that the poison is in the dosage! British entertainer & musician the late Roy Castle died after a long struggle with cancer, from playing in all those smoke filled clubs for years. I think smoking is pretty disgusting on some ways but I believe people have a right to smoke, but not inflict the unpleasantness on others. However, the issue of 2nd hand smoke was the way the “science” was presented, with a fair amount of duplicity & falsehoods, but for IMHO a worthy cause although I cannot sanction the methods used, that’s why activists took up the colours as they are not restrained by professional considerations. I believe it should have been handled very differently. I personally hate the smell cigarette smoke on by clothes, hair, etc. but love the smell of a good cigar or a pipe. That’s the way I am!
It begs the question, when does a scientist allow his/her personal feelings & belief systems to adjust the science because the cause is apparently noble, anyone spring to mind????? If the scientific facts demonstrate the opposite viewpoint, then this must be right & honesty should & must prevail. As a professional engineer, I cannot lie to a client or his/her neighbour (UK spelling folks), that’s why lawyers are brought in (only when necessary hopefully) to determine who should speak to whom & when if at all.
(BTW the Numberwatch definition of a Lawyer = a magician who can conjour up money from nowhere! Best I’ve ever heard!):):):) I was only joking please don’t sue me I can’t afford it.
Also, unlike the Al Gores & James Hansens of this world, we are mere human beings, & mistakes can be made, so can we all show a little moor tolorence on speling unles it is a grows errer as I understand this is an internashnal sight, & that spelchekker is only partly usfull!
Go NIPCC!
PS: I am now very self-conscious about my spelling!
Oh Pierre Gosselin, being a proud Brit & an Englishman to boot (surely there is no other worthy existence in life?) I don’t mind who spells what to whom, as long as it can be justified by what is right for them, we are after all different from country to country. The only reason the spelling is different is largely due to computerisation & Microsoft, & for simplification in America with a truly international community population, although I am sure there was an element of “we’re not going to do it that way” after that slight misunderstanding between our two countries in the last quarter of the 18th century!. I maintain to this day that we should never have lost the Virginian Colonies! Seriously, I know what is right in the UK, & I traditionally prefer the UK “ized” to the USA “ised”, although a good dictionary should allow both as correct. I have to hand my 2nd hand 1925 Pocket Oxford Dictionary that I have used for 20 years to write letters, reports, assessments, etc, & it possesses the most wonerful words & origins of them, that are lost on todays younger generation, sadly IMHO, but that’s progress they tell me. I discovered in it the most glorious expression, “Splenlow & Jorkins” from a Dicken’s novel, & it means to attribute one’s hard or unfair dealings (Spenlow) to one’s partner (Jorkins) so as to appear innocent! Fabulous stuff!

iceFree
October 25, 2008 5:37 am

Leif Svalgaard (02:08:13) :
I have heard that many did people did not want their names on the IPCC reports either. It cut’s both ways.
I can give some names, can you?
Paul Reiter is one
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Reiter

October 25, 2008 5:53 am

Bruce Cobb (05:13:02) :
I see Leif isn’t on the list of speakers. That is too bad, and perhaps partly explains his attitude. Sour grapes. I must say, Leif,

Nonsense
your true colors have really shown through on this thread, unfortunately.
If so, explain what they are, so I can see if you have grasped the situation.
Warning: Lets all stop baiting Leif, please. – Dee Norris
Dee, I can handle him.
Reply: I know you can handle them, but we all need to steer clear of ad hominem attacks or baiting. That is part of what separates WUWT from, er, Open Minds. – Dee

October 25, 2008 6:15 am

Leif Svalgaard (05:53:52) :
Bruce Cobb (05:13:02) :
Reply: I know you can handle them, but we all need to steer clear of ad hominem attacks or baiting. That is part of what separates WUWT from, er, Open Minds. – Dee
Well, it will be interesting to see if the culprits heed the warning.

Ed Scott
October 25, 2008 6:51 am

Dee Norris (23:55:58) :
Patton (22:01:01):
An email friend, a retired constitutional lawyer, has become so frustrated with the current political prospects for America that he sent an email to his correspondents informing us that he and his wife were taking up residence in Galt’s Gulch.
A pure democracy always fails and that is the reason the Founding Fathers formed our Constitutional Republic, limiting government and emphasizing inalienable individual rights, which would otherwise be taken by a democratic majority.
I remember very little of the history of the United States from my high school days, a time when history was a history and not an indoctrination, but I do remember the history teacher saying that the power to tax was the power to destroy.
The current classification of CO2 as a pollutant by the SCOTUS, provides the government with a powerful incentive to tax our very existence. Here is an example from the EU which may well portend the future for the US:
Europe Forcing Airlines to Buy Emissions Permits
BRUSSELS — European Union governments gave formal approval Friday to a potentially costly system of capping greenhouse gases from any airline flying into or out of the trade bloc — just as the airline industry reported new evidence of the impact of a worsening economy.
European justice ministers meeting in Luxembourg approved the greenhouse gas measures, which oblige airlines, regardless of nationality, that land or take off from an airport in the European Union to join the emissions trading system starting on Jan. 1, 2012.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/25/business/worldbusiness/25emissions.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
The choices seem to be: Fight, or flight to Galt’s Gulch.

October 25, 2008 6:57 am

I guess those AGW folks will have to go out and get a real job….oh wait, they’ve lived off government grants to spew their dribble…no wonder they are so focused on trying to get us all to believe it…they don’t want to lose their gravy train! 🙂
http://www.cookevilleweatherguy.com

Joseph Murphy
October 25, 2008 7:07 am

Dee…
Paternalism in the U.S. compared to socialism always seemed to me to be a distinction in origin rather than application. I would also say that distinguishing facism as far right and socialism as far left is an oversimplification mixed with a misunderstanding of facism and the right. On the other hand it is hard to defend the far left against what they seem to openly embrace.
With a degree in political science and a degree in philosophy, we are finally moving onto a topic I can discuss! Although waaaaay OT! 😉

Ed Scott
October 25, 2008 7:07 am

Reply: “…That is part of what separates WUWT from, er, Open Minds. – Dee
I would have said Vacant Minds, but that may have been construed to be an ad hominem attack on the mentally handicapped.

Admin
October 25, 2008 7:30 am

I’m a bit late to this party, I’m traveling yesterday and today and have only occasional Internet. Thanks to everyone who dropped some help (and more) into the tip jar, you’ll each get a personal thank you when I’m able to get some serious Internet time.
– Anthony

iceFree
October 25, 2008 7:41 am

I simply and honestly wanted to reply to Leif about my earlier post about the IPCC
He asked me to name a scientist who wanted his name removed from the IPCC
report. The one that comes to my mind first is Paul Reiter is a professor of medical entomology at the Pasteur Institute.
He objected to the IPCC claim that global warming would lead to the spread of
tropical Diseases like malaria to northern climates. Malaria is not an exclusively tropical disease.
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200506/ldselect/ldeconaf/12/12we21.htm

Alan the Brit
October 25, 2008 8:08 am

Just typical isn’t it! I’ve gone & made few typos noew, what a twit Brit!
Ed Scott:
That’s the EU for you, we’re riddled with a mix of environmental activists & bureaucrats in Europe. I think if the truth be known, many within the Union disagree with its all encompassing state interference all in the name of our own well being, it’s rather like the Doctor giving you medicine you didn’t ask for & didn’t want! Never question the EU mantrs of knowing what’s best for us all.
Watch out USA, be on your guard at all times, I am neither left nor right, but we over here are ruled by an unelected, undemocratic, unaccountable, & more importantly, unsackable, & corrupt intellectual elite – government appointed Commissioners with absolute power (unelected) ex-party leaders/primeministers et al etc with their noses well & truly embedded into the gravey train of taxpayers money! Watch the taxpayer funded organisations grow exponentially in time. All the current political admistration does is pass laws to reduce & restrict freedom of choice, thought, & deed, but then again that’s the whole point. Don’t get me wrong, I am very proud of our NHS & some other organisations, but it’s the Politically Correct institutions that you have to be aware of, they seem to hold inexhausible power & authority! Some of us look to you over there for an example of hope.
Look what happaned to mercury. The EU band it, well in liquid form (I may have said this before so forgive me), so traditional clock & barometer makers & repairers went out of business, (yes I’m a clock nut!) thank goodness for the Channel Islands – the EU hates them with a vengence because they exert little or no control over them. However, we are being forced to give up ordinary light bulbs in favour of low-energy ones which contain mercury vapour, the nasty stuff of Mad Hatter fame. Interestingly local authorities seem to have little idea on how to dispose of these items, & they’re band from landfills. Just one of many examples of badly drafted legislation from the EU! The ONLY reason I use these new bulbs is that they do save energy, & last longer, & that’s all!
I’ve given up checking for typos!

Pierre Gosselin
October 25, 2008 8:20 am

Concerning the idea floated by Anna,
Sure it’d be nice to have a conference that is not sponsored by a political organisation. But beggars can’t be choosers, now can they? You have to pick your allies where you can.
You’ve got a multitude of political organisations, politicans, Hollywood, big business, Big Media and a huge powerful swath of major US and international government agencies lined up behind a very scientifically dubious position, and we want to take them on without the help a a few lone political organisations?!?!
Good luck!
Sadly, science alone is not going to overcome the widespread brainwashing that has taken place. Science is going to need some voices and public relations. Be happy we have what we have. If it weren’t for them, we wouldn’t be on the radar!
Sure, science will evenually prevail. But I’d prefer if it does so in my lifetime, or the next, and not in 500 years. I’d be very careful about spurning the few allies we have. United we stand, divided we fall.

Pamela Gray
October 25, 2008 8:29 am

Wow. That took some time to read through. I also have seen very bad science, very bad scientific methods, and even worse, changing data points to better match the desired trend. The “pristine” results were published in a major journal. Although the hypothesis was in a field other than climate, if it can happen in one Ivory Tower, it can happen in others. So here is what I think: This kind of garbage happens, and gets printed, on BOTH sides of the climate debate. And now it is time to go fishing.

Perry Debell
October 25, 2008 8:57 am

Dee Norris (21:15:21) :
Nice.
Dee Norris (23:55:58) :
Even nicer
$10 sent to Anthony.
My thanks and best wishes,
Perry

Perry Debell
October 25, 2008 9:09 am

Pierre Gosselin (03:22:14) :
With nearly one million words in the English language it’s not surprising we have a great many words relating to carnal issues. We’ve got lots of words to suit all sorts of bloody interesting situations. I get my coat, shall I?
http://www.slate.com/id/2139611/
Perry

Perry Debell
October 25, 2008 9:13 am

Correction.
I shall get my coat and just leave.
Perry

October 25, 2008 9:14 am

Alan: band = Beatles, Rolling Stones, Pink Floyd, Moody Blues, etc.

Alan the Brit
October 25, 2008 9:32 am

For band read banned!
I am a self-taught typist but then so are most of you guys but I sometimes type too fast with odd fingers! Apolgies made. No excuses I always own up to my mistakes. Thanks for pointing them out, I ‘must try harder’ 6/10! See me later!
See, I am human.

pyromancer76
October 25, 2008 9:45 am

It seems to me that the reason that AGW (aka Climate Change/”Sustainability”) is canceled is because THERE IS NO SCIENCE TO SUPPORT THE CLAIM and this conference is about the science, not presenting varying positions as in a political debate. And Anthony’s integrity, respectful views, and keeping everyone on topic — the science — is what makes this blog one of the very best. I appreciate his investigation into the funding for the conference before he would take part.
Pet Rock
“Everyone should support real science. We don’t need extremist zealots. I don’t see much difference between the extreme right (like Hitler) and the extreme left (like Stalin). Or between the actions of their zealot followers, whether Brown Shirts or Red Guard. They are not the right model to follow.”
Please check your history. Hitler started out as a “National Socialist”. Check out the neocons of the Bush administration and you will find that they all began as “leftists”. (HT Jon Cifre, Savage Politics blog)
Lucy Skywalker has an excellent idea.
“If some of the presentations (e.g Keynote speakers) were available as live webcasts for pre-registered log-in (free or very nominal cost), this probably wouldn’t affect attendance but would reach a wide audience, with some interesting stats from registrations or even just IP addresses.”
For someone like myself who cannot travel to attend (and who cannot afford the conference fee), free or nominal cost live webcasts of some of the papers would be a magnificent opportunity.

Bill P
October 25, 2008 11:08 am

Re: Paulson’s moment of truth with bankers:
“It was Midas Mulligan’s turf, wasn’t it?”
I was thinking more along the lines of Br’er Rabbit. As in, “Please, Massah Paulson, please don’ thow me in that there briar patch. Please!”
This is the way the world ends. Not with a whim, but a banker.

1 5 6 7 8 9 12