AW: [ RadSafe ] extremism

[Rainer.Facius at dlr.de]

Ruth,

if you want to assess the plausibility/validity of his arguments - why not check them out, no matter where they went to the printer. Where I was able to check his claims in the literature referenced by him, I could not detect unfaithful citations. Particularly impressed I was by seeing his allegations of selective/fraudulent treatment by IPCC authors of (short and long-term) historic climate data born out by the papers quoted, most brazenly among those the infamous variants of Mann's hockey-stick curves. So the most important support for IPCC's futuristic projections (which I consider mandatory but not sufficient), the correct reconstruction of the past, for me is melting away like the Alpine glaciers did in Roman times. If you care, I might send you some of Jaworowski's papers below. (Of course you will not find such topics referenced in PUBMED.)

Best regards, Rainer 

Regarding the (deceptive) support for a nuclear energy revival which the CO2 hysteria might provide in the public, I prefer to rely on more rational arguments such as safety and efficacy which will stand the test of time.

Jaworowski Z.
Ice core data show no carbon dioxide increase.
21st Century, (Spring 1997)42-52

Jaworowski Z.
Climate Change: Incorrect information on pre-industrial CO2.
Statement written for the Hearing before the US Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, March 19, 2004

Jaworowski Z.
CO2: The Greatest Scientific Scandal of Our Time.
EIR Science (March 16, 2007)38-53

Jaworowski Z, Segalstad T V, Ono N.
Do glaciers tell a true atmospheric CO2 story?
The Science of the Total Environment 114(1992)227-284

Jaworowski Z.
Solar Cycles, Not CO2, Determine Climate.
21st Century (Winter 2003-2004)52-64

 

Von: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl im Auftrag von Ruth Sponsler
Gesendet: Mi 21.03.2007 18:42
An: Maury Siskel
Cc: radsafe
Betreff: Re: [ RadSafe ] extremism


Dr. Jaworowski has 17 papers listed on a PubMed
search.  All of those papers concern measurement of
radiation, radiation protection, and related topics. 

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?CMD=search&DB=pubmed

Only one paper is remotely relevant to climatology.
It concerns 226Ra in contemporary and fossil snow.

Given the pubs I found, I consider Dr. Jaworowski to
be an authority on topics concerning radiation,
Chernobyl etc., but I do not consider him an authority
on climate. 

I am sort of wondering why Dr. Jaworowski decided to
write a controversial article on climate change after
writing some pretty decent papers in the area of his
expertise, radiation.

On the other side of the spectrum, Al Gore is showing
his weakness in the area, by supporting Amory Lovins'
silly ideas, rather than large-scale sources of
CO2-free energy.  Al Gore certainly isn't a
climatologist.

There are excellent critiques of Al Gore from fellow
bloggers at NEI Nuclear Notes:

http://neinuclearnotes.blogspot.com/search/label/Al%20Gore

Sincerely -

Ruth Sponsler