Reviews of articles by: Fred Singer

ARTICLE REVIEWS

Wall Street Journal commentary grossly misleads readers about science of sea level rise

in The Wall Street Journal, by Fred Singer

“The article has almost nothing to do with the modern state of sea-level science. The author tries to call into question that global warming causes sea-level rise, and does so by cherry-picking a short segment of data from 1915-1945, a time when data quality is poor and the warming signal small—a bizarre approach that could never pass scientific peer review and is apparently aimed at misleading a lay audience.”

— 18 May 2018


CLAIM REVIEWS

Fred Singer incorrectly claims sea level rise is not caused by climate change

CLAIM
"Sea-level rise does not seem to depend on ocean temperature, and certainly not on CO2"

SOURCE: Fred Singer, The Wall Street Journal, 15 May 2018

VERDICT

Natural variability can not explain modern global warming, as Heartland Institute report claims

CLAIM
"Neither the rate nor the magnitude of the reported late twentieth century surface warming (1979–2000) lay outside normal natural variability."

SOURCE: Craig Idso, Robert Carter, S. Fred Singer, Heartland Institute, 2016

VERDICT

A lull in solar activity would have little effect on global temperatures; claims of “global cooling” are not based on science

CLAIM
"Forward projections of solar cyclicity imply the next few decades may be marked by global cooling rather than warming, despite continuing CO2 emissions."

SOURCE: Craig Idso, Robert Carter, S. Fred Singer, Heartland Institute, 2016

VERDICT

Global warming has not “ceased”, as Heartland Institute report falsely claims

CLAIM
"global warming ceased around the end of the twentieth century and was followed (since 1997) by 19 years of stable temperature"

SOURCE: Craig Idso, Robert Carter, S. Fred Singer, Heartland Institute, 2016

VERDICT

CO2 is a greenhouse gas that caused warming during past climate changes, notably as a feedback amplifying other factors

CLAIM
"Increases in atmospheric CO2 followed increases in temperature. Therefore, CO2 levels could not have forced temperatures to rise."

SOURCE: Craig Idso, Robert Carter, S. Fred Singer, Heartland Institute, 2016

VERDICT

Heartland Institute report’s claim that climate models are too sensitive to CO2 does not reflect evidence

CLAIM
"[climate models] systematically over-estimate the sensitivity of climate to carbon dioxide ... and modelers exclude forcings and feedbacks that run counter to their mission"

SOURCE: Craig Idso, Robert Carter, S. Fred Singer, Heartland Institute, 2016

VERDICT

Heartland Institute report incorrectly claims no evidence of human impacts in melting ice

CLAIM
"Melting of Arctic sea ice and polar icecaps is not occurring at ‘unnatural’ rates and does not constitute evidence of a human impact on the climate."

SOURCE: Craig Idso, Robert Carter, S. Fred Singer, Heartland Institute, 2016

VERDICT

Global sea level rise is accelerating, despite Heartland Institute report’s claims otherwise

CLAIM
"Best available data show sea-level rise is not accelerating. Local and regional sea levels continue to exhibit typical natural variability—in some places rising and in others falling."

SOURCE: Craig Idso, Robert Carter, S. Fred Singer, Heartland Institute, 2017

VERDICT

The Sun cannot explain recent global warming, contrary to what Heartland Institute report claims

CLAIM
"Solar forcings are not too small to explain twentieth century warming. In fact, their effect could be equal to or greater than the effect of CO2 in the atmosphere."

SOURCE: Craig Idso, Robert Carter, S. Fred Singer, Heartland Institute, 2016

VERDICT

Climate sensitivity estimate given in Heartland Institute’s report is misleading

CLAIM
"Doubling the concentration of atmospheric CO2 from its pre-industrial level, in the absence of other forcings and feedbacks, would likely cause a warming of ~0.3°C to 1.1°C"

SOURCE: Craig Idso, Robert Carter and S. Fred Singer, Heartland Institute, 2017

VERDICT