Let’s have a look at the list :
1) Don Easterbrook
Don Easterbrook in the past has been accused of fraud for manipulating data. And only last week Gareth Renowden shred Easterbrook’s last guestarticle at WWUT to pieces. In fact, this post was so deeply flawed even the uncritical WUWT-started raising questions. Eminent scientist ? I don’t think so…
2) Syun Akasofu
Akasofu is not a climate scientist, and it really shows in his paper ‘on the recovery of the little ice-age’ which isn’t all that coherent. There are so many problems in this paper there’s no beginning addressing them.
3) Mojib Latif
4) Noel Keenlyside
Latif and Keenlyside published a paper on long-term fluctuations which they think would affect the rate of heating. They did not say earth would be cooling.
The graph of this paper is given below
|Mojib Latif global warming pause|
Doesn’t show any cooling if you ask me.
Above that Latif clearly said in an interview that we risk “an unprecedented warming in the history of mankind if no measures are taken to cut global carbon dioxide emissions”. Doesn't sound like someone predicting global cooling, isn’t it ?
EIKE misrepresented his work.
6) Kyle SwansonAnother misrepresentation. Swanson wrote : What do our results have to do with Global Warming, i.e., the century-scale response to greenhouse gas emissions? VERY LITTLE, contrary to claims that others have made on our behalf.
That’s where i gave up. if you keep distorting people’s visions, even after they clearly said their work is being misrepresented, in my opinion you are being dishonest.
If EIKE has any decency, it withdraws the list. Something tells me that won’t happen though.
Do also look at Skeptical Science’s Not so cool predictions.
UPDATE : I've been told the EIKE-article is a translation and the original source is Pierre Gosselin's website :
UPDATE 2 : I posted a comment on EIKE's blog. The only things Michael Limburg had to say were :
*"you should blog under your real name"
*"Akasofu works for the International Arctic Research Center. So he's a climate scientist." Akasofu worked (he's retired) as a solar scientist. Being a specialist in one domain does NOT make you a specialist in other topics. As Akasofu's error-loaded paper illustrates.
The nitpicking is exactly what i expected. More interesting is what Limburg did not adress : all the *real* problems with the list. It seems he doesn't seem to see any problems in deliberately misrepresenting people's visions.