Further reading

Dr David Evans – Climate Coup

Evans, formerly of the Australian Greenhouse Office, distils the science and politics into two very approachable documents.

Download links are HERE

Dr Roy Spencer on climate feedbacks

To review, the main feedback issue is this: In response to the small direct warming effect of more CO2 in the atmosphere, will clouds change in ways that amplify the warming (e.g. a cloud reduction letting more sunlight in, which would be a positive feedback), or decrease the warming (e.g. a cloud increase causing less sunlight to be absorbed by the Earth, which would be a negative feedback)?

Read it here.

Climate Science Corrupted – John McLean


John McLean

An in-depth account of why the IPCC is as biased as it is. It’s a real eye-opener.

It is long overdue that the IPCC was called for what it is, an activist eco-political body driven not by the dangerous manmade warming evidence that it pretends exists, but by the beliefs and philosophies of its sponsor, the UNEP, and by key individuals at the time the IPCC was established.

Download it here. (PDF)

Global bullies want your money – Jo Nova

Global bullies want your money

Jo Nova

“It’s unthinkable. Big Government has spent $79 billion on the climate industry, 3000 times more than Big-oil. Leading climate scientists won’t debate in public and won’t provide their data. What do they hide? When faced with legal requests they say they’ve “lost” the original global temperature records. Thousands of scientists are rising in protest against the scare campaign. Meanwhile $126 billion turned over in carbon markets in 2008 and bankers get set to make billions.”

Download it here.

The Skeptics Handbook – Joanne Nova

If you want a concise introduction to the problems with the climate change consensus, there is no better place to start.

The Bottom Line Is Simple

Don’t fall for the “complexity” argument or accept vague answers. The climate is complex, but the only thing that matters here is whether adding more CO2 to the atmosphere will make the world much warmer.

Everything hinges on this one question. If carbon dioxide is not a significant cause, then carbon sequestration, cap-and-trade, emissions trading, and the Kyoto agreement are a waste of time and money. All of them divert resources away from things that matter— like finding a cure for cancer or feeding Somali babies. Having a real debate IS the best thing for the environment.

Download it here.

The NIPCC Report

An in-depth scientific analysis of all that is wrong with IPCC science.

On June 2, as Congress debated global warming legislation that would raise energy costs to consumers by hundreds of billions of dollars, the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC) released an 880-page book challenging the scientific basis of concerns that global warming is either man-made or would have harmful effects.

In “Climate Change Reconsidered: The 2009 Report of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC),” coauthors Dr. S. Fred Singer and Dr. Craig Idso and 35 contributors and reviewers present an authoritative and detailed rebuttal of the findings of the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), on which the Obama Administration and Democrats in Congress rely for their regulatory proposals.

The scholarship in this book demonstrates overwhelming scientific support for the position that the warming of the twentieth century was moderate and not unprecedented, that its impact on human health and wildlife was positive, and that carbon dioxide probably is not the driving factor behind climate change.

Visit the NIPCC Report page here, where you can download individual chapters as PDFs.

Alternatively, download the full report in PDF here (8MB).

CO2 Science

Check out their site weekly for peer-reviewed science here, or add their RSS feed to your reader of choice.

List of 450 900+ peer-reviewed sceptical papers

Next time someone says “None of the sceptics are peer-reviewed,” point them here.