In an open letter e-mailed to the officials of UCLA’s Hammer Forum, Weather Channel co-founder John Coleman (shown) stated straightforwardly: “There is no significant man-made global warming at this time, there has been none in the past and there is no reason to fear any in the future.”
Coleman sent his message to the forum officials four days before the October 23 event held at UCLA’s Hammer Museum, titled “Tackling Climate Change Nationally and Globally.”
A description of the event provided by UCLA revealed that it unabashedly took the “global warming is caused by man” side of the ongoing climate debate and that the only two presenters were well-known global warming alarmists:
Despite the overwhelming scientific consensus that global warming is a danger to the planet, little progress has been made to reduce CO2 emissions. Climatologists Brenda Ekwurzel and Michael Mann join us to examine the issue. Ekwurzel works with the Union of Concerned Scientists leading education aimed at increasing support for strong climate legislation. Mann shared the Nobel Prize with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and is the author of The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars: Dispatches From The Front Lines and Dire Predictions: Understanding Global Warming.
Mann, a professor of meteorology at Penn State University, became famous (or infamous, depending on who does the defining) more than a decade ago with his hockey-stick graph showing temperatures spiking abruptly in the late 20th century after holding relatively steady for most of the last millennium.
However, many scientists, a congressional investigation, and even the 2009 Climategate controversy called Mann’s research methods further into question.
After National Review published a reprint of an article originally appearing on the website of Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI), Mann filed a complaint in 2012 against the journalists and their publishers for libel and the "intentional infliction of emotional distress."
Mark Steyn, the National Review columnist who had reprinted the CEI piece, wrote, “I noticed on the press release (published on his Facebook page) that Dr. Mann claimed to have been ‘awarded the Nobel Peace Prize’ and that on the complaint itself we are accused of the hitherto unknown crime of ‘defamation of a Nobel Peace Prize recipient.’ ” When National Review asked the Nobel Foundation, it denied Mann has ever won a Nobel prize.
When Thomas Richard of The Examiner contacted Geir Lundestad, director of the Norwegian Nobel Institute, Lundestad stated: “Michael Mann has never been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.” Lundestad continued: “Unfortunately we often experience that members of organizations that have indeed been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize issue various forms of personal diplomas to indicate that they personally have received the Nobel Peace Prize. They have not.”
Yet, the Hammer Forum promotion’s description, “Mann shared the Nobel Prize,” clearly implies that Mann was a recipient.
Breitbart News published an article about the lawsuit on August 15 (headlined: “Mann v Steyn: If This Trial Ever Goes Ahead Global Warming Is Toast”) in which writer James Delingpole noted: “Michael Mann is exploiting the flaws in the US legal system to try to draw out proceedings as long as possible in order to exhaust — or bankrupt — Steyn into submission.”
Delingpole is optimistic about Steyn’s prospects, however, and writes: “Unfortunately for Mann he picked the wrong victim. Steyn is a fighter who knows his way round the courts.”
This, if Steyn is successful, could be the moment the dam bursts: the one where the global establishment is finally forced to acknowledge the fraudulence, the corruption, the mendacity, the trickery, the deception, the junk science, the big money and the official complicity which for the last two or three decades have been underpinning the Great Climate Change Scam.
The other presenter at the forum, Dr. Brenda Ekwurzel, is a “Senior Climate Scientist” at the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), and has been widely condemned by conservatives, libertarians, and even Dr. Jerry Falwell, who warned Christians against "falling for ... global warming hocus-pocus" propagated in the mass media, with the UCS “leading the charge.”
A writer in Human Events on May 8, 2007 said of UCS:
For almost four decades, the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) has manipulated the high reputation of “science” to serve the low ends of politics. It has done a good job of cherry-picking scientific facts to stir up public fears to advance its agenda. This time it is promoting alarmist claims about global warming by leveraging the prestige of the “concerned scientist.”...
That UCS is a highly partisan operation — well funded by left-leaning foundations and Hollywood celebrities and happy to ignore established scientific methodologies for its own purposes—is apparently not newsworthy. The group has a long history of being just plain wrong on many scientific issues, and its current agenda conforms to the extremes of environmentalist ideology.
With Mann and Ekwurzel as its only presenters, the Hammer Forum on climate change was obviously stacked to present only one side of the debate. This prompted Coleman to write:
William Happer, Ph.D., Princeton University, Richard Lindzen, Ph.D., Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Willie Soon, Ph.D., Harvard Smithsonian Observatory, John Christy, Ph.D., University of Alabama and 9,000 other Ph.D. scientists all agree with my opening two sentences. [That there is no manmade global warming at this time and efforts to prove that carbon dioxide is a significant “greenhouse” gas and pollutant causing significant warming or weather effects have failed.] Yet at your October 23 Hammer Forum on Climate Change you have scheduled as your only speakers two people who continue to present the failed science as though it is the final and complete story on global warming/climate change. This is [a] major mistake.
Britain’s Express reported that Coleman based his research on the findings of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), a body of scientists who have joined together to offer a second opinion of the assertions made by the UN’s International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). NIPCC is sponsored by three nonprofit organizations: Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change; Science and Environmental Policy Project (SEPP); and The Heartland Institute.
A statement on the NIPCC website notes:
Whereas the reports of the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) warn of a dangerous human effect on climate, NIPCC concludes the human effect is likely to be small relative to natural variability, and whatever small warming is likely to occur will produce benefits as well as costs.
Photo: John Coleman