Controversy is swirling over new upcoming skeptic book.
It begins with DIE ZEIT’s latest article on the controversial new skeptic book authored by Prof Dr. Fritz Vahrenholt (renewable energy expert) and Dr. Sebastian Lüning (expert geologist) which will hit the bookstores on February 6, published by the renown Hoffmann & Campe in Hamburg. It has the warmist activists scared out of their wits.
The book German warmists fear.
An old saying goes: Better to remain quiet and let people think you may be dumb, than to open your mouth and to confirm it. Two authors at the German online DIE ZEIT nationwide weekly, Stefan Schmitt and Christian Tenbrock, not only confirmed it, but they also jumped right into it, feet first, in their latest hit piece here.
DIE ZEIT labels skeptic scientists “deniers”
Worse, the once respectable DIE ZEIT weekly, which Wikipedia calls “highly respected for its quality journalism”, stooped into the gutter and maliciously labelled scientists who doubt the catastrophic global warming religion as “deniers”. We all know why the word denier was chosen, and not “skeptic”. They ought to be served papers for defamation.
They haven’t even read the book
Schmitt und Tenbrock’s article is filled with Rahmstorfian-type falsehoods. What’s remarkable is that they go after the book and its two authors without having ever read it! (book release is February 6). If they had waited a little longer to read it, they would have spared themselves all the embarrassment of their ridiculous claims, falsehoods, and thus confirmation of some dumbness.
Lüning and Vahrenholt are luke-warmers
Their only crime of course is that the book’s authors are open-minded and have also evaluated skeptic arguments in their overall assessment. Their book Die kalte Sonne cites more than 800 sources from both sides, and from the middle. In fact, Vahrenholt was once a more or less a devout warmist – until he dug deeper. Yet, DIE ZEIT writes at the very beginning:
“RWE manager Fritz Vahrenholt doubts further global warming.”
He does not. Indeed it helps to read the book first.
Schmitt and Tenbrock then claim Vahrenholt and Lüning insist the impacts of CO2 emissions can be neglected. But anyone who is familiar with the contents of the book, as I am, can say that this is also false. The truth is that Drs. Lüning and Vahrnholt clearly state that CO2 is responsible for perhaps half of the warming. This is in line with what Prof. Mojib Latif believes. DIE ZEIT is trying to frame it as a yes-or-no issue. Their sole interest is starting a food-fight, and preventing a discussion.
DIE ZEIT imposes a thought-ban
Schmitt and Tenbrock of DIE ZEIT also blast the two authors for attending a skeptic conference in Munich last November. What’s wrong with that? Why not listen to both sides of the argument? Has a thought-ban been enacted in Germany? Or is this something one finds only at DIE ZEIT? Are we only to march like drones, never questioning green dogma?
It just happens that some of the speakers at the Munich Conference are also guest authors of the book and who happen to be distinguished scientists, among them Henrik Svensmark and Nir Shaviv. If Schmitt and Tenbrock had waited and read the book first, they would have known of their contribution to the book, and certainly would have learned to spell their names correctly. Tells you what they really know about climate science.
Ignorant when it comes to the CERN CLOUD experiment
Schmitt und Tenbrock are also not only unaware of the book’s contents, but also of what CLOUD project at CERN is about. They claim that CLOUD results don’t confirm anything, and make it sound like the experiment is finished. They appear not to know that only Phase I is completed. And preliminary results indeed do fit Svensmark’s theory – like a glove. The next phase of the experiment will test to see if the tiny aerosols can form into larger ones, and is expected to end in 2014. Not only should they wait and read the book, they also ought to wait for the results of CLOUD before opening their mouths and confirming more dumbness.
Lüning and Vahrenholt “against 1000s of scientists”
DIE ZEIT (Schmitt and Tenbrock) use the old worn out consensus argument. The global warming sham is in reality perpetuated by a only few dozen scientists who have high stakes in the game. As I already wrote, Lüning and Vahrenholt cite hundreds of sources, many peer-reviewed, that challenge the AGW hypothesis and which the IPCC simply ignores. And what did the Wall Street Journal just publish? Obviously Schmitt and Tenbrock have not read that either. Do they read at all?
On page 2, DIE ZEIT uses the unfortunate “denier” slur to criminalize skeptic scientific views. I wonder if they would say that to Nir Shaviv’s face. Obviously that has backfired big time and it fully exposes their real, malicious, agenda.
Finally Schmitt and Tenbrock claim:
At the latest since the 1980s, the Earth has been warming differently than it did in pre-industrial times, and no longer in sync with solar activity.“
Last I’ve looked, the Earth hasn’t warmed at all over the last 15 years. And if they had waited and read the book, the DIE ZEIT authors would have seen that the 22nd and 23rd solar cycles were intense ones. And, like the IPCC, DIE ZEIT simply ignores the major roles played by oceanic cycles.
To judge a book, it first helps to read it
It’s obvious that Schmitt und Tenbrock, who appear to be hopelessly biased, have long closed their minds. They were never interested at all in finding out the truth. If they had been, they would have waited and read the book – or at least interviewed Lüning and Vahrenholt.
And so with such journalists, the question arises of whether DIE ZEIT is to be taken as an open, intellectual weekly, or if it has devolved itself to being a narrow-minded purveyor of dogmatism. Can we really take DIE ZEIT seriously?
To answer that question. let’s hope Vahrenholt and Lüning send a letter of rebuttal to Die Zeit. If they are truly open, DIE ZEIT will publish it, and have alittle talk with their journalists. But I’d bet a king’s fortune they won’t. I can tell you the answer already, I had the chance of reading the book’s manuscript, and I know Lüning and Vahrenholt would take the DIE ZEIT piece apart in short order. Papers are not in the habit of further embarrassing themselves.
DIE ZEIT’s modus operandi
These types of journalists appear underworld-like. Journalistic drive-by shootings are sadly no longer new at DIE ZEIT and now appear to be their modus operandi. They did the same with Fred Singer, read here.
Hopefully, DIE ZEIT will someday get back to the practice of intelligent journalism, and end the cheap character assassinations and smearing. Now would be a good time for DIE ZEIT to keep their mouths closed – and to not reopen them until after February 6th.
Surely between now and then they’ll find something intelligent to say.
Do you know if this book will be available in english?
I would like to read it.
Hopefully yes. Hopefully every language!
Preemptive strikes by the leftist journalist front. But it won’t work; soviet style agitation and propaganda only works when you have complete control over the media. The way it is, by mentioning Vahrenholt, his book, and EIKE, they just make their own readers curious. Notice that a lot of the comments under the article are of a wait-and-see attitude, or even CAGW skeptical. There are also True Believers, but it looks balanced.
Right you are! I noticed that as well. Once they read the book in its entirety, they’ll be kissing true-believing goodbye. My wife read parts of the manuscript and was convinced AGW is hysteria after only Chapter 3 (book has 9 chapters)!
Soon, we might need no books anymore to convince anyone…
Some very long range forecasts by David Archibald.
http://joannenova.com.au/2012/01/global-cooling-coming-archibald-uses-solar-and-surface-data-to-predict-4-9c-fall/
SC24 will be 17 years long; probably followed by an even longer, even weaker cycle. Maunder minimum had cycles up to 22 year old. Archibald forecasts very severe drops in global temperature.
THAT would be a catastrophe.
Especially after all the anti-energy steps that have been taken.
The world has warmed since the end of the little ice age. In the twentieth century it seems (to me at least) that the main drivers of global temperature has been ocean water temperature, namely the PDO. Now if those solar/climate theories are correct we may be entering another period of little ice age.
Amazingly there is a group of “clever” individuals who wish to leave a legacy to the world, they believe that their words and actions can save mankind from itself. Scientists, journalists, politicians and eco activists base their beliefs on virtual reality and dodgy accounting.
If David Archibalds predictions come to fruition many of these campaigners will be alive to see their place in history being put into print. In Britain we already have two newspapers that are willing to print the other side of the argument.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2071053/Growth-climate-change-sceptics-37-think-claims-exaggerated.html
One being the daily mail which has the most visited newspaper site on the web.
UNEP says Climate Change fuels sex trade in Cambodia. h/t Climate Depot
http://greenanswers.com/news/274241/effects-climate-change-fuels-sex-trade-cambodia
Now, we don’t have rising temperatures for a decade. Imagine WHAT would happen if temperatures were rising!
UNEP and the warmists are now completely desperate.
When our planet enters a Maunder-like minimum cold period following SC24 and possibly SC25, the climate catastrophists will try to take credit by saying that the cooling is due to the number of wind turbines installed across the globe….LOL.
Last book I read was the The Delinquent Teenager by Donna Laframboise. Great read, destroys the IPCC in one fell swoop. I purchased the e-book for a few dollars. I’m waiting for this one in English, cannot wait. It’s not that I need to be convinced, but I love knowledge. In fact, it was Al Gore’s extremism (An Inconvenient Truth) that made check the science and turned me into a proper skeptic, realising that AGW is, was, all a money scam.
About mainstream media journalists: These journalists had tied their reputation to the AGW thing. Now, realising that their journalistic paradigm is collapsing they know that once the scam is over, they have to go back to school and learn another trade (or scam)
They will have to explain this though
http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/
I think there are two types of journalists: The storytellers; found e.g. at Der Spiegel, who tell a narrative and frame facts into their narrative, and drop the narrative when it becomes impossible to uphold and start another one. Der Spiegel has already switched from the CAGW narrative to the class warfare narrative.
And then there are some honest ones.
Not reading a book before loudly condemning it has become quite the norm over here. The current vogue – as far as the public noticed – was started with Thilo Sarrazin, but the habit goes back a bit farther. This happened already to Lomborg’s “The Skeptical Environmentalist”, Courtois’ et al. “Black Book of Communism”, Fukuyama’s “The End of History” and Huntington’s “Clash of Civilizations”. Let’s leave it as an exercise for the readers to ask of these titles have something in common…
It seems like an attempt to the ZEIT to recoup some of the journalistic standing they have lost over the last 20 years. They used to have almost the prestige of Der Spiegel as a critical weekly, a bit more liberal and scientifically/economically literate, but every critical reader they had stopped even skipping the rag between ca. 1988 and 1995 (with me it was their coverage of Chernobyl), and since then they have simply slipped below the radar of everyone.
Die Zeit, is a rag.
Schmitt and Tenbrock, for all their vapid attempts at belittling and smear are puny hacks and they merely highlight their critical and cognitive inadequacies, it’s truly sad monotonous stuff.
I hardly think those two esteemed gentlemen, Prof Dr. Fritz Vahrenholt and Dr. Sebastian Lüning will really loose any sleep over this guff. In fact, I think they’ll be sneakily smiling – all PR [even bad] is all to the good – it will blow wide open the whole green charade in Germany…………………….. and ’bout time too.
I am afraid I stopped reading Die Zeit at the beginning of December, when in one issue they had:
8 long articles about the evils of global warming
6 articles about the evils of atomic energy
4 anti-capitalism articles
I realised then that they were just another agenda-driven outlet for a certain world-view
“Forget global warming – it’s Cycle 25 we need to worry about (and if NASA scientists are right the Thames will be freezing over again)”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2093264/Forget-global-warming–Cycle-25-need-worry-NASA-scientists-right-Thames-freezing-again.html
“Meanwhile, leading climate scientists yesterday told The Mail on Sunday that, after emitting unusually high levels of energy throughout the 20th Century, the sun is now heading towards a ‘grand minimum’ in its output, threatening cold summers, bitter winters and a shortening of the season available for growing”
Ths mornings mail on line
Wonderful! (Not the coming cold; but the mail article. The sooner the public wakes up to realities, the sooner the politicians will be forced to follow.)
(Hmm, shouldn’t they lead? Nevermind…)
meteomedia warns about weeks of cold with down to -15 deg C during the day in Germany; and the possibility of a very stable high over Scandinavia; models say it’ll last 10 days and maybe longer. Starting for real on Wednesday.
http://wetter.t-online.de/wochenlanger-dauerfrost-droht-deutschland-einzufrieren/id_53575358/index
When we have such stable highs, wind power output comes to a halt. If the Brokdorf nuke has to shut down during that time, Hamburg will get a blackout.
If that happens, tell everyone up there: “Sorry, comrade citizen, you have to get through this so it will get even colder.” Every day. (Sorry, I forgot – with a blackout, there will be no e-mail. Or mobile phones.)
It is possible that the high will be situated farther north, and together with a southern European low forms a conveyor belt that blows winds over the Balitc Sea, from Russia to Germany. In that case, wind power will be produced, but the relatively mild sea will evaporate tons of water which will be dumped on the German coast (and on Hamburg). The problem with that is that the exact same spots will receive the snow, maybe over weeks.
I’m not working in Hamburg right now but 200km south of it; lucky me. Should be safe.
-15 daytime T, wow it ain’t Siberian but that’s pretty damn cold.