90 Leading Italian Scientists Sign Petition: CO2 Impact On Climate “UNJUSTIFIABLY EXAGGERATED” … Catastrophic Predictions “NOT REALISTIC”

NOTE: The English version of the petition that follows below is an unpolished translation of the original Italian version. The English version still needs to be polished up a bit, but it fully and accurately conveys the overall thrust of the original Italian version.

In 1517, a 33-year-old theology professor at Wittenberg University walked over to the Castle Church in Wittenberg and nailed a paper of 95 theses to the door, hoping to spark an academic discussion about their contents. Source. The same is happening today in Italy concerning climate science as dogma.

90 Italian scientists sign petition addressed to Italian leaders

To the President of the Republic
To the President of the Senate
To the President of the Chamber of Deputies
To the President of the Council

PETITION ON GLOBAL ANTHROPGENIC HEATING (Anthropogenic Global Warming, human-caused global warming)

The undersigned, citizens and scientists, send a warm invitation to political leaders to adopt environmental protection policies consistent with scientific knowledge.

In particular, it is urgent to combat pollution where it occurs, according to the indications of the best science. In this regard, the delay with which the wealth of knowledge made available by the world of research is used to reduce the anthropogenic pollutant emissions widely present in both continental and marine environmental systems is deplorable.

But we must be aware that CARBON DIOXIDE IS ITSELF NOT A POLLUTANT. On the contrary, it is indispensable for life on our planet.

In recent decades, a thesis has spread that the heating of the Earth’s surface of around 0.9°C observed from 1850 onwards would be anomalous and caused exclusively by human activities, in particular by the emission of CO2 from the use of fossil fuels in the atmosphere.

This is the thesis of anthropogenic global warming [Anthropogenic Global Warming] promoted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) of the United Nations, whose consequences would be environmental changes so serious as to fear enormous damage in an imminent future, unless drastic and costly mitigation measures are immediately adopted.

In this regard, many nations of the world have joined programs to reduce carbon dioxide emissions and are pressured by a intense propaganda to adopt increasingly burdensome programs whose implementation involves heavy burdens on the economies of the individual member states and depend on climate control and, therefore, the “rescue” of the planet.

However, the anthropogenic origin of global warming IS AN UNPROVEN HYPOTHESIS, deduced only from some climate models, that is complex computer programs, called General Circulation Models .

On the contrary, the scientific literature has increasingly highlighted the existence of a natural climatic variability that the models are not able to reproduce.

This natural variability explains a substantial part of global warming observed since 1850.

The anthropogenic responsibility for climate change observed in the last century is therefore UNJUSTIFIABLY EXAGGERATED and catastrophic predictions ARE NOT REALISTIC.

The climate is the most complex system on our planet, so it needs to be addressed with methods that are adequate and consistent with its level of complexity.

Climate simulation models do not reproduce the observed natural variability of the climate and, in particular, do not reconstruct the warm periods of the last 10,000 years. These were repeated about every thousand years and include the well-known Medieval Warm Period , the Hot Roman Period, and generally warm periods during the Optimal Holocene period.

These PERIODS OF THE PAST HAVE ALSO BEEN WARMER THAN THE PRESENT PERIOD, despite the CO2 concentration being lower than the current, while they are related to the millennial cycles of solar activity. These effects are not reproduced by the models.

It should be remembered that the heating observed since 1900 has actually started in the 1700s, i.e. at the minimum of the Little Ice Age , the coldest period of the last 10,000 years (corresponding to the millennial minimum of solar activity that astrophysicists call Maunder Minimal Solar ). Since then, solar activity, following its millennial cycle, has increased by heating the earth’s surface.

Furthermore, the models fail to reproduce the known climatic oscillations of about 60 years.

These were responsible, for example, for a warming period (1850-1880) followed by a cooling period (1880-1910), a heating (1910-40), a cooling (1940-70) and a a new warming period (1970-2000) similar to that observed 60 years earlier.

The following years (2000-2019) saw the increase not predicted by the models of about 0.2 ° C  [two one-hundredths of a degree]per decade, but a substantial climatic stability that was sporadically interrupted by the rapid natural oscillations of the equatorial Pacific ocean, known as the El Nino Southern Oscillations , like the one that led to temporary warming between 2015 and 2016.

The media also claim that extreme events, such as hurricanes and cyclones, have increased alarmingly. Conversely, these events, like many climate systems, have been modulated since the aforementioned 60-year cycle.

For example, if we consider the official data from 1880 on tropical Atlantic cyclones that hit North America, they appear to have a strong 60-year oscillation, correlated with the Atlantic Ocean’s thermal oscillation called Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation .

The peaks observed per decade are compatible with each other in the years 1880-90, 1940-50 and 1995-2005. From 2005 to 2015 the number of cyclones decreased precisely following the aforementioned cycle. Thus, in the period 1880-2015, between number of cyclones (which oscillates) and CO2 (which increases monotonically) there is no correlation.

The climate system is not yet sufficiently understood. Although it is true that CO2 is a greenhouse gas, according to the IPCC itself the climate sensitivity to its increase in the atmosphere is still extremely uncertain.

It is estimated that a doubling of the concentration of atmospheric CO2, from around 300 ppm pre-industrial to 600 ppm, can raise the average temperature of the planet from a minimum of 1° C to a maximum of 5° C.

This uncertainty is enormous.

In any case, many recent studies based on experimental data estimate that the climate sensitivity to CO2 is CONSIDERABLY LOWER than that estimated by the IPCC models.

Then, it is scientifically unrealistic to attribute to humans the responsibility for warming observed from the past century to today. The advanced alarmist forecasts, therefore, are not credible, since they are based on models whose results contradict the experimental data.

All the evidence suggests that these MODELS OVERESTIMATE the anthropogenic contribution and underestimate the natural climatic variability, especially that induced by the sun, the moon, and ocean oscillations.

Finally, the media release the message according to which, with regard to the human cause
of current climate change, there would be an almost unanimous consensus among scientists that the scientific debate would be closed.

However, first of all we must be aware that the scientific method dictates that the facts, and not the number of adherents, make a conjecture a consolidated scientific theory .

In any case, the same alleged consensus DOES NOT EXIST. In fact, there is a remarkable variability of opinions among specialists – climatologists, meteorologists, geologists, geophysicists, astrophysicists – many of whom recognize an important natural contribution to global warming observed from the pre-industrial period and even from the post-war period to today.

There have also been petitions signed by thousands of scientists who have expressed dissent with the conjecture of anthropogenic global warming.

These include the one promoted in 2007 by the physicist F. Seitz, former president of the American National Academy of Sciences, and the one promoted by the Non-governmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), whose 2009 report concludes that “Nature, not the activity of Man governs the climate”.

In conclusion, given the CRUCIAL IMPORTANCE THAT FOSSIL FUELS have for the energy supply of humanity, we suggest that they should not adhere to policies of uncritically reducing carbon dioxide emissions into the atmosphere with THE ILLUSORY PRETENSE OF CONTROLLING THE CLIMATE.



  1. Uberto Crescenti, Emeritus Professor of Applied Geology, University G. D’Annunzio, Chieti-Pescara, formerly Rector and President of the Italian Geological Society.
  2. Giuliano Panza, Professor of Seismology, University of Trieste, Academician of the Lincei and of the National Academy of Sciences, called of the XL, 2018 International Award of the American Geophysical Union.
  3. Alberto Prestininzi, Professor of Applied Geology, La Sapienza University, Rome, formerly Scientific Editor in Chief of the magazine International IJEGE and Director of the Geological Risk Forecasting and Control Research Center.
  4. Franco Prodi, Professor of Atmospheric Physics, University of Ferrara.
  5. Franco Battaglia, Professor of Physical Chemistry, University of Modena; Galileo Movement 2001.
  6. Mario Giaccio, Professor of Technology and Economics of Energy Sources, University G. D’Annunzio, Chieti-Pescara, former Dean of the Faculty of Economics.
  7. Enrico Miccadei, Professor of Physical Geography and Geomorphology, University G. D’Annunzio, Chieti-Pescara.
  8. Nicola Scafetta, Professor of Atmospheric Physics and Oceanography, Federico II University, Naples.


  1. Antonino Zichichi, Emeritus Professor of Physics, University of Bologna, Founder and President of the Ettore Center for Scientific Culture Majorana di Erice.
  2. Renato Angelo Ricci, Professor Emeritus of Physics, University of Padua, former President of the Italian Society of Physics and Society European Physics; Galileo Movement 2001.
  3. Aurelio Misiti, Professor of Health-Environmental Engineering, University of Sapienza, Rome.
  4. Antonio Brambati, Professor of Sedimentology, University of Trieste, Project Manager Paleoclima-mare of PNRA, already President of the National Oceanography Commission.
  5. Cesare Barbieri, Professor Emeritus of Astronomy, University of Padua.
    6. Sergio Bartalucci, Physicist, President of the Association of Scientists and Tecnolgi for Italian Research.
    7. Antonio Bianchini, Professor of Astronomy, University of Padua.
    8. Paolo Bonifazi, former Director of the Institute of Interplanetary Space Physics, National Astrophysical Institute.
    9. Francesca Bozzano, Professor of Applied Geology, Sapienza University of Rome, Director of the CERI Research Center.
    10. Marcello Buccolini, Professor of Geomorphology, University University G. D’Annunzio, Chieti-Pescara.
    11. Paolo Budetta, Professor of Applied Geology, University of Naples.
    12. Monia Calista, Researcher in Applied Geology, University G. D’Annunzio, Chieti-Pescara.
    13. Giovanni Carboni, Professor of Physics, Tor Vergata University, Rome; Galileo Movement 2001.
    14. Franco Casali, Professor of Physics, University of Bologna and Bologna Academy of Sciences.
    15. Giuliano Ceradelli, Engineer and climatologist, ALDAI.
    16. Domenico Corradini, Professor of Historical Geology, University of Modena.
    17. Fulvio Crisciani, Professor of Geophysical Fluid Dynamics, University of Trieste and Marine Sciences Institute, Cnr, Trieste.
    18. Carlo Esposito, Professor of Remote Sensing, La Sapienza University, Rome.
    19. Mario Floris, Professor of Remote Sensing, University of Padua.
    20. Gianni Fochi, Chemist, Scuola Normale Superiore of Pisa; scientific journalist.
    21. Mario Gaeta, Professor of Volcanology, La Sapienza University, Rome.
    22. Giuseppe Gambolati, Fellow of the American Geophysica Union, Professor of Numerical Methods, University of Padua.
    23. Rinaldo Genevois, Professor of Applied Geology, University of Padua.
    24. Carlo Lombardi, Professor of Nuclear Plants, Milan Polytechnic.
    25. Luigi Marino, Geologist, Geological Risk Forecasting and Control Research Center, La Sapienza University, Rome.
    26. Salvatore Martino, Professor of Seismic Microzonation, La Sapienza University, Rome.
    27. Paolo Mazzanti, Professor of Satellite Interferometry, La Sapienza University, Rome.
    28. Adriano Mazzarella, Professor of Meteorology and Climatology, University of Naples.
    29. Carlo Merli, Professor of Environmental Technologies, La Sapienza University, Rome.
    30. Alberto Mirandola, Professor of Applied Energetics and President of the Research Doctorate in Energy, University of Padua.
    31. Renzo Mosetti, Professor of Oceanography, University of Trieste, former Director of the Department of Oceanography, Istituto OGS, Trieste.
  6. 32.Daniela Novembre, Researcher in Mining Geological Resources and Mineralogical Applications, University G. D’Annunzio, Chieti Pescara.
    33. Sergio Ortolani, Professor of Astronomy and Astrophysics, University of Padua.
    34. Antonio Pasculli, Researcher of Applied Geology, University G. D’Annunzio, Chieti-Pescara.
    35. Ernesto Pedrocchi, Professor Emeritus of Energetics, Polytechnic of Milan.
    36. Tommaso Piacentini, Professor of Physical Geography and Geomorphology, University G. D’Annunzio, Chieti-Pescara.
    37. Guido Possa, nuclear engineer, formerly Deputy Minister Miur.
    38. Mario Luigi Rainone, Professor of Applied Geology, University of Chieti-Pescara.
    39. Francesca Quercia, Geologist, Research Director, Ispra.
    40. Giancarlo Ruocco, Professor of Structure of Matter, La Sapienza University, Rome.
    41. Sergio Rusi, Professor of Hydrogeology, University G. D’Annunzio, Chieti-Pescara.
    42. Massimo Salleolini, Professor of Applied Hydrogeology and Environmental Hydrology, University of Siena.
    43. Emanuele Scalcione, Head of Regional Agrometeorological Service Alsia, Basilicata.
    44. Nicola Sciarra, Professor of Applied Geology, University G. D’Annunzio, Chieti-Pescara.
    45. Leonello Serva, Geologist, Director of Geological Services of Italy; Galileo Movement 2001.
    46. Luigi Stedile, Geologist, Geological Risk Review and Control Research Center, La Sapienza University, Rome.
    47. Giorgio Trenta, Physicist and Physician, President Emeritus of the Italian Association of Medical Radiation Protection; Galileo Movement 2001.
    48. Gianluca Valenzise, Director of Research, National Institute of Geophysics and Volcanology, Rome.
    49. Corrado Venturini, Professor of Structural Geology, University of Bologna.
    50. Franco Zavatti, Astronomy Researcher, University of Bologna.
    51. Achille Balduzzi, Geologist, Agip-Eni.
    52. Claudio Borri, Professor of Construction Sciences, University of Florence, Coordinator of the International Doctorate in Engineering Civil.
    53. Pino Cippitelli, Agip-Eni Geologist.
    54. Franco Di Cesare, Executive, Agip-Eni.
    55. Serena Doria, Researcher of Probability and Mathematical Statistics, University G. D’Annunzio, Chieti-Pescara.
    56. Enzo Siviero, Professor of Ponti, University of Venice, Rector of the e-Campus University.
    57. Pietro Agostini, Engineer, Association of Scientists and Tecnolgi for Italian Research.
    58. Donato Barone, Engineer.
    59. Roberto Bonucchi, Teacher.
    60. Gianfranco Brignoli, Geologist.
    61. Alessandro Chiaudani, Ph.D. agronomist, University G. D’Annunzio, Chieti-Pescara.
    62. Antonio Clemente, Researcher in Urban Planning, University G. D’Annunzio, Chieti-Pescara.
    63. Luigi Fressoia, urban architect, Perugia.
    64. Sabino Gallo, nuclear engineer.
    65. Daniela Giannessi, First Researcher, Ipcf-Cnr, Pisa.
    66. Roberto Grassi, Engineer, Director of G&G, Rome.
    67. Alberto Lagi, Engineer, President of Restoration of Complex Damaged Plants.
    68. Luciano Lepori, Ipcf-Cnr Researcher, Pisa.
    69. Roberto Madrigali, Metereologo.
    70. Ludovica Manusardi, Nuclear physicist and scientific journalist, Ugis.
    71. Maria Massullo, Technologist, Enea-Casaccia, Rome.
    72. Enrico Matteoli, First Researcher, Ipcf-Cnr, Pisa.
    73. Gabriella Mincione, Professor of Sciences and Techniques of Laboratory Medicine, University G. D’Annunzio, Chieti-Pescara.
    74. Massimo Pallotta, First Technologist, National Institute for Nuclear Physics.
    75. Enzo Pennetta, Professor of Natural Sciences and scientific divulger.
    76. Nunzia Radatti, Chemist, Sogin.
    77. Vincenzo Romanello, Nuclear Engineer, Research Center, Rez, Czech Republic.
    78. Alberto Rota, Engineer, Researcher at Cise and Enel.
    79. Massimo Sepielli, Director of Research, Enea, Rome.
    80. Ugo Spezia, Engineer, Industrial Safety Manager, Sogin; Galileo Movement 2001.
    81. Emilio Stefani, Professor of Plant Pathology, University of Modena.
    82. Umberto Tirelli, Visiting Senior Scientist, Istituto Tumori d’Aviano; Galileo Movement 2001.
    83. Roberto Vacca, Engineer and scientific writer.

55 responses to “90 Leading Italian Scientists Sign Petition: CO2 Impact On Climate “UNJUSTIFIABLY EXAGGERATED” … Catastrophic Predictions “NOT REALISTIC””

  1. bonbon

    It is high time that scientists spoke out.
    Yet, Luther was not a scientist – Nicolas De Cusa before him was, and laid the foundation for modern research with his De Docta Ignoranta.
    Mr. Mann et al. with their science-is-settled are more radical than Luther.

    Unfortunately Luther, as also Henry VII, in breaking the Church against Erasmus’ advice unleashed 100 years of slaughter in Europe.

    It sure does look like Climate has become a pagan religion, Gaia, and even the Pope today has signed on.

    I would like to see the Vatican’s response to this scientists bulletin, now that Greta spoke there! Will they ex-communicate these (did they threaten Salvini)?

  2. Jollygreenman

    I see a tourist was sadly killed when the volcano on the island of Stromboli erupted this week.

    How will the eruption of this volcano on Italian soil be taxed and will the carbon emissions be added to the Paris accord target?

    I know it is a stupid, insensitive, and senseless question, but, I am just asking to show the stupidity of Saint Greta and her followers.

    1. Newminster

      What is stupid, Jollygreenman, is the whole concept of “controlling CO2 emissions!

  3. MGJ

    Much as I dislike the idea of experts signing petitions – I think it was Einstein who responded by saying that if he were shown to be wrong then one signature would do just fine – I must concede that it is probably a healthy sign that at least a few scientists are prepared to risk their careers, their safety and even their lives by speaking out against a feral, violent Left.

  4. Reasonable Skeptic

    I hope this gets picked up and spread wide. It is about time scientists fought for truth against the wave of activists who want to fix what isn’t broken.

  5. Dr G.M Lindsay

    Hopefully this is the start of a pragmatic and fact based fight back against the green fascists who seem hell bent on dragging us all back to the Dark Ages.
    Suggestions as to how to share this far and wide appreciated

  6. Stephen Way

    In the end it is far better and easier to live in a warm climate than a cold one.

  7. Herlicht

    Yes Stephan, historical evidence confirms this .

  8. David

    There has been a Stoogeification process in the academic world. Instead of Swinging the Alphabet, the new stooges have come up with climate change. Instead of supporting this theory with actual data, the stooges change the data. All the stooges do is provide anecdotal evidence by focusing on weather when it is warm and ignoring contrary evidence.

    1. bonbon

      Etymology :
      1913, “stage assistant,” of uncertain origin, perhaps an alteration of student (with the mispronunciation STOO-jent), in sense of “apprentice.” Meaning “lackey, person used for another’s purpose” first recorded 1937, perhaps influenced by the Three Stooges film comedy act, which had been appearing in movies since 1930, starting as “Ted Healy and His Stooges.”

      Larry and Moe were hilarious, not so Mann and his stooges.

  9. alsonotrick

    p. gosselin:

    please clarify a portion of your statement:

    This is the thesis of anthropic global warming [Anthropogenic Global Warming] promoted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) of the United Nations, whose consequences would be environmental changes so serious as to fear enormous damage in an imminent future”,

    *****”unless drastic and costly mitigation measures do not are immediately adopted”

    please explain “do not are immediately adopted”

  10. Anders Valland

    Oh, but all of these are paid by Big Oil. Or if they’re not they are just stupid enough to believe what Big Oil says. In any case, some of them are old. What do old people know anyway? /sarc

    1. Henning Nielsen

      Not only old, I bet they are white as well. Say no more. It’s worse than we thought.

  11. José Luis Esteban

    Please correct the phrase “Nature does not, the activity of Man governs the climate”.
    The original Italian phrase “La natura, non l’attività dell’Uomo governa il clima” means “Nature, not the activity of Man governs the climate”.

    1. Mark

      I agree. The way this bit is currently phrased is confusing, and at worst could be interpreted in a way that’s completely opposite to how it’s meant to be.

      I want to share this article but would like such obvious errors in translation to be fixed first.


      1. E. B.

        Thank you!

      2. Mark

        Thank you, P Gosselin, for fixing that sentence, and for posting the translated version of the petition in the first place.

  12. bonbon

    What is very interesting is this petition appears in the middle of a titanic battle between Italy and the EU Council (Council of Trent anyone?)

    Many scientists follow Kant’s Categorical Imperative, but it is clear science and politics cannot be seperated.
    Politics should be science-driven – the climate mob puts the cart before the horse.

    1. mwhite

      Yep,looks like the EU will eventually destroy itself


  13. 90 italienische Wissenschaftler unterzeichnen Petition gegen Klimaalarm – EIKE – Europäisches Institut für Klima & Energie

    […] Englische Übersetzung hier […]

  14. Gunnar Jacobsen

    There is a serious flaw in the English translation. The translation says “Nature does not, the activity of Man governs the climate”. But the Italian text say exactly the opposite “La natura, non l’attività dell’Uomo governa il clima”, the nature, not the activity of man governs the climate.

  15. 97% of Scientists Agree: Global Warming is Massively Overhyped – Synthesisr

    […] to #cutthroughthenoise of ‘Climate Change’ consensus, with a recent article signed by YET MORE global scientists coming out of the woodwork to share their distaste at the highly-politicised subject of Global Warming. But first some […]

  16. 90 italienische Wissenschaftler unterzeichnen Petition gegen Klimaalarm - Leserbriefe

    […] Englische Übersetzung hier […]

  17. Giovanni

    For the Italians interested, you can see an alternate review of this petition here:

  18. MC Italy

    For those who doesn’t read italian,nothing substantial on this “alternate review”.Doesn’t worth a translation.

  19. Thorstein

    The Italiens have balls. I heard nothing from our German colleagues.

  20. | Alternativnews - Meldungen aus alternativen Medien

    […] 90 Leading Italian Scientists Sign Petition: CO2 Impact On Climate „UNJUSTIFIABLY EXAGGERATED&… […]

  21. Gus

    Quote: ” … The following years (2000-2019) saw the increase not predicted by the models of about 0.2 ° C [two one-hundredths of a degree]per decade … ”

    The comment in the square brackets (two one-hundredth) is not in the original and is, of course, incorrect. It’s two-tenth.

  22. Yonason

    More on how it’s a scam, from here…

    ”…I think it’s still a bad idea to try to reduce CO2 in the atmosphere even if we could. One billion people could starve to death because of that. And even the tiny, heating effect of the extra CO2 is almost certainly a net benefit.

    But this paper in Science should be viewed as a new proof of a simple assertion: If CO2 were a problem, the total cost of the solution would be something like $300 billion, so everyone who wants to rob mankind of tens of trillions of dollars in the coming decades must be treated as a dangerous criminal. All legally impeccable methods to eliminate these criminals must be found and applied.”

  23. Cindy Lathrop

    Prayer for everyone to open their hearts and look for answers without fear.

  24. Energy & Environmental Newsletter: July 8, 2019 - Master Resource

    […] 90 Leading Italian Scientists Sign Petition: CO2 Impact On Climate “Unjustifiably Exaggerated&… […]

  25. Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup #366 | Watts Up With That?
  26. Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup #366 - Sciencetells
  27. marco

    The large majority of the signatories are not climatologists, nor climate phisics or specialists in climate.
    Most of them ar not even scientists at all (engineers, architects and all).
    The first signator (Mr Zichici) is a -quite old- retired phisics professors well known in Italy for his weird political stances.

    Their point might be correct, but this petition is crap. The scientific debate shall take place within the scientific community, not brought to the public place as a political argument. What is the President of the Republic supposed to do on this? Take decisions on climate? Call a referendum?

    Climate change anlysis is a very complex matter, that’s the only sure thing.

    1. Yonason

      Let’s Play “Spot The Troll.”

      ”The first signator (Mr Zichici) is a -quite old- retired phisics professors – marco

      “Mr” ???? …just some “really (quite) old” guy…????

      How about… ”Emeritus Professor of Advanced Physics at the University of Bologna, has authored over 1100 scientific papers…”

      ”The scientific debate shall take place within the scientific community, not brought to the public place as a political argument.” – marco

      lololol – Sure, marco. Warmists have the high ground, and we can trust them …NOT!

    2. John Brown


      no offense, but if the analysis of climate change is complex, then there will be no single authority, that can claim they have all the knowledge to come up with a conclusion. It will be and is combined effort of interdisziplinary science. If I want to hazard a guess a physisist would be well equiped to understand the very basics of the energy tranfers and more likly to understand atmospheric physics than a metereologist will understand mechanics.

      If you wanted only climate scientist to sign that petition to make it count, you could as well write an email to the few “real” ones in Italia to get their personal opinion. This petition is a sign that consensus is one of the past.

  28. Weekly Local weather and Power Information Roundup #366 – All My Daily News
  29. Faktencheck! Ist die CO2 Sensations-Petition echt? | Hagen Grell

    […] 90 italiensche CO2- und Klima-Top-Wissenschaftler haben eine Petition gegen die CO2-Panik unterschrieben. Ist sie echt?#fridaysforfuture #CO2 #KlimaLink zum Artikel:http://www.opinione.it/cultura/2019/06/19/redazione_riscaldamento-globale-antropico-clima-inquinamento-uberto-crescenti-antonino-zichichi/Video von Oliver Janich:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=poWqLye8jJ8Quellen und Links zur Folge:https://notrickszone.com/2019/07/04/90-leading-italian-scientists-sign-petition-co2-impact-on-climat…http://www.opinione.it/cultura/2019/06/19/redazione_riscaldamento-globale-antropico-clima-inquinamento-uberto-crescenti-antonino-zichichi/http://www.opinione.it/https://www.facebook.com/lopinione/https://www.iceagenow.info/daring-italian-scientists-buck-the-agw-trend/https://twitter.com/NoTricksZone/status/1146728105761038336http://www.opinione.it/cultura/2019/06/19/redazione_riscaldamento-globale-antropico-clima-inquinamento-uberto-crescenti-antonino-zichichi/?altTemplate=Stampa&fbclid=IwAR1YAoqulAKKXJTY-uzRfSEaX-G6NRpVOckp3nVE7iiTAgOQu8DMHGUxRnEhttps://www.unich.it/ateneo/l-uda/rettori-della-dannunziohttp://theglobal.review/books-papers/reflections-on-the-future-of-our-planets-climate/#prettyPhotohttps://twas.org/sites/default/files/member/cvpanzaeng2016.pdfhttps://hr.linkedin.com/in/prestininzi-alberto-99225871Video von Oliver Janich:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=poWqLye8jJ8▶ Newsletter : http://www.hagengrell.de/newsletter ▶ Telegram : https://t.me/hagengrell ▶ Sicherungskanal : https://www.bitchute.com/hagengrell/ ▶ IBAN : DE38 8605 5592 1090 1636 10 / Sparkasse Leipzig / BIC : WELADE8LXXX ▶ Paypal : https://www.paypal.me/HagenGrell ▶ Bitcoin : 1LeebMVtXGvky19AcoYAzuZaqdEhQe6gzn ▶ Litecoin : LLzhCaFjYWexWZnymHRCBftPXyNtoxAcB8 ▶ BitcoinCash : 1665ZmMvfwTxXbcVs2W6YpxNUYPVbzXsnc ▷ Dieser Kanal lebt von euren Spenden! ▷ Bitte FÖRDERT meine Arbeit, damit es weiter geht! ▶ HAUPTKANAL : https://www.youtube.de/iprotestblog ▶ Sicherungskanal : https://www.bitchute.com/hagengrell/ ▶ Zweitkanal : https://www.youtube.de/hagenshirnticker ▷ E-Post : hagengrell@gmail.com ▷ Twitter : https://twitter.com/HagenGrell ▷ Instagram : https://www.instagram.com/hagengrell1/ ▷ Google Plus: https://plus.google.com/+HagenGrell ▷ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/iprotest.le/ ▷ LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/hagen-grell-7b4388153/ […]

  30. tom0mason

    Maybe some of these people would give their talents to a legal battle that could start soon.
    There could be a legal challenge to to BBC’s lack of perceived impartiality coming if enough names and money can be donated…


  31. Bob Armstrong

    So let’s see the counter petition from the 3000 climate scientists in the 97% consensus .

    2000 maybe ?

    1000 ?

    500 ?

    90 ?

  32. 90 Scientists: Global Warming is a Total Hoax – The Northwest Connection

    […] Folks, don’t let the Talking Snake Media lie to you. Not only does man-caused global warming not exist, it is the scientific hoax of the century. And 90 leading Italian scientists say so. […]

  33. 90 scientists: Global warming is a total hoax | Science-Theory

    […] Folks, don’t let the Talking Snake Media lie to you. Not only does man-caused global warming not exist, it is the scientific hoax of the century. And 90 leading Italian scientists say so. […]

  34. Bob graham

    Finally! Some scientists have stood up to the political machine inside the IPCC, who have led the flight to idiocy with their vilifying of CO2, without a single piece of evidence!
    There are many others who applaud ans support their contention – dont waste money on a flawed plan to “control climate”, and deal with real world problems.

    The MSM is a large part of the problem with their incessant publishing of climate horror stories, all blamed on man of course. Anything for a headline.

  35. Marlo Lewis

    Correction: “The following years (2000-2019) saw the increase not predicted by the models of about 0.2 ° C [two one-hundredths of a degree] per decade,”

    The words in brackets should be “one-tenth of a degree”

  36. Marlo Lewis

    Whoops, my correction needs a correction. 0.2 ° C per decade means “two-tenths of a degree per decade.” The University of Alabama in Huntsville satellite record indicates the warming rate was even lower, as the global trend is now 0.13°C per decade since December 1978: https://www.nsstc.uah.edu/climate/2019/may2019/GTR_201905May_1.pdf

  37. AFA.net – 90 Scientists: Global Warming | Monat Energy

    […] People, don't let you lie to the Talking Snake Media. Not only is there no global warming caused by man, but it is also the century's scientific hoax. And 90 leading Italian scientists say so.  […]

  38. 90 führende italienische Wissenschaftler unterzeichnen Petition: CO2-Auswirkungen auf Klima „ungerechtfertigt übertrieben“, Katastrophenvorhersagen „nicht realistisch“ | ajmarciniak

    […] […]

  39. Der Beitrag von Journa­listen zum aufstei­genden Klima-Alarm – EIKE – Europäisches Institut für Klima & Energie

    […] NIPCC; NIPCC; NIPCC; No Tricks Zone; CO2Science; No Tricks Zone; Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine; The Heartland Institute; The Heartland […]

  40. Der Beitrag von Journa­listen zum aufstei­genden Klima-Alarm - Leserbriefe

    […] NIPCC; NIPCC; NIPCC; No Tricks Zone; CO2Science; No Tricks Zone; Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine; The Heartland Institute; The Heartland […]

  41. CO2 heeft gewoonweg nauwelijks tot geen invloed op het klimaat • JDreport.com

    […] op sociale media en bij de niet gevestigde media en blogs dan toch. Zo was er de verklaring van 90 Italiaanse wetenschappers, die zeggen dat die klimaatopwarming door schuld van menselijk CO2 […]

  42. Waarom menselijke CO2-uitstoot net zoveel te maken heeft met klimaatverandering als een ooievaar met de geboortes van kinderen

    […] meldden zich 90 Italiaanse wetenschappers, die stelden dat klimaatverandering door menselijk toedoen ‘een onbewezen hypothese’ is en er […]

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this. More information at our Data Privacy Policy