Richard Lindzen Testifies Before Parliment and AGW Alarmists - James Delingpole, The Telegraph

Professor Richard Lindzen is one of the world's greatest atmospheric physicists: perhaps the greatest. What he doesn't know about the science behind climate change probably isn't worth knowing. But even if you weren't aware of all this, even if you'd come to the talk he gave in the House of Commons this week without prejudice or expectation, I can pretty much guarantee you would have been blown away by his elegant dismissal of Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming theory.

Read more at The Telegraph...


Download and read his complete speech here...

Here's a brief excerpt...

Here are two statements that are completely agreed on by the IPCC. It is crucial to be aware of their implications.

1. A doubling of CO2, by itself, contributes only about 1C to greenhouse warming. All models project more warming, because, within models, there are positive feedbacks from water vapor and clouds, and these feedbacks are considered by the IPCC to be uncertain.

2. If one assumes all warming over the past century is due to anthropogenic greenhouse forcing, then the derived sensitivity of the climate to a doubling of CO2 is less than 1C. The higher sensitivity of existing models is made consistent with observed warming by invoking unknown additional negative forcings from aerosols and solar variability as arbitrary adjustments.

Given the above, the notion that alarming warming is ‘settled science’ should be offensive to any sentient individual, though to be sure, the above is hardly emphasized by the IPCC.

• Carbon Dioxide has been increasing 

• There is a greenhouse effect

• There has been a doubling of equivalent CO2 over the past 150 years

• There has very probably been about 0.8 C warming in the past 150 years

• Increasing CO2 alone should cause some warming (about 1C for each doubling)

Nothing on the left *(above) is controversial among serious climate scientists.

Nothing on the left *(above) implies alarm. Indeed the actual warming is consistent with less than 1C warming for a doubling.

* (above) added by me.

Unfortunately, denial of the facts on the left, has made the public presentation of the science by those promoting alarm much easier. They merely have to defend the trivially true points on the left; declare that it is only a matter of well- known physics; and relegate the real basis for alarm to a peripheral footnote – even as they slyly acknowledge that this basis is subject to great uncertainty. We will soon see examples of this by the American Physical Society and by Martin Rees and Ralph Cicerone.