To The President of the Heartland Institute

Mr. Joseph Bast

Dear Joseph,

I had the privilege to visit your Chicago conference last month together with Tom Lackmann from the CCS New Media. Your conference was most enjoyable and I would like to say “thank you” once again. It was really great! Please allow me to list some of the lessons I learnt thanks to your conferecne:

1. Science is not a consensus activity, not built on majority votes.
2. Science does not depend on the agreement of experts.
3. Science depends on verification, either through experimentation or observation.

I do owe gratitude to the Heartland Institute for founding the NIPPC in 2007 as an overdue counterweight to the overwhelming public appearance of the IPCC as part of the United Nations. But when you really want to win this battle, you must overpower and knock-out the strategic opponent IPCC. You promised: we all were gathered in Chicago to learn the truth about climate change: whether it is really occurring, and what might be the causes. Therefore I was a little bit astonished when after my return to Europe I read the fabulous thick book “Climate Change Reconsidered”: “Note: We do not say anthropogenic greenhouse gases produce some warming or has not in the past.”

Of course I do not belong to the crooks within the IPCC. But please allow me a short statement as a scientist – thus from a scientific point of view. From my professional und scientific background I have quite a different opinion about global warming! I’m deeply convinced that the earth is not a greenhouse and that the so-called “natural greenhouse effect” of 33° C is on of the biggest and most sophisticated fraud or myth in physics. The effect doesn’t exist and was only invented to disturb our minds and to convince the mankind that without greenhouse gases in the atmosphere there would be no life on the frozen Earth (-18°C). But caution, this is not true and physically abnormal and impossible!

All guests and visitors of the Conference were asked for comments and concerns. After a first glance over the incredible amount of papers I want to turn your attention towards two basic remarks:

1. I missed a definition of the word/concept “climate”. If the international accepted definition of the “World Meteorological Organization” is correct than climate is an expression of the “normal weather” at one place of the earth over a time period of 30 years. “Climate Change” is caused by weather changes and doesn’t cause weather changes! In ancient Greek language “climate” means “inclination”! Because the amount of insolation (heat per unit area) depends on the angle of the sun above the horizont, it varies with time of day, with latitude and with the seasons. When the sun is low in the sky, its incoming energy is spread thinly over a wide surface area. Note: The inclination of the sunrays cause the seasons, the tropical and polar climates with their totally different weather regimes. Because of the ambiguity of the word “climate” it is conclusive necessary to define and declare it.

1. The IPCC claims: the greenhouse effect is real! This is not true! It is an artificially calculated effect, under totally unnatural assumptions. Therefore it is impossible to scrutinize it by experiments. The IPCC would scream Halleluja and the NIPCC would have no chance at all! Thanks God the earth is not a greenhouse and open to sky, because there is a permanent open radiation window between 8 and 12 micrometers. Through this “window” the whole warmth of the heated earth can easily escape as infrared radiation into space, with light-velocity. The infrared pictures of the surface temperatures of the earth by weather satellites are a clear proof of this. Note: No liquid or solid, especially a black solid, which permanently looses energy/heat by infrared radiation can get warmer. It cools and must be heated up, like the earth after a cloudless night by the sun!

Only these two impulses I want to give your Heartland Institute and the Marshall Institute before planning future conferences. I’m a friend of liberty and intellectual independence. You and we all must win! Why? A greenhouse is a house for plant cultivation growing. A greenhouse is not a convict prison to accustom people to strict discipline under a taskmaster like Al Gore!

In the excellent book “Thinking Physics” L. Epstein and P. Hewitt caution their readers: “don’t rely on words, or equations, until you can picture the idea they represent”.

With kind regards sincerely yours,

Wolfgang Thüne