Frederick Seitz Quotes

It is baffling, I must say, that in our modern world we have such blind trust in science and technology that we all accept what science tells us about everything - until, that is, it comes to climate science.

The biologists have essentially been pushed aside. Al Gore's just an opportunist. The person who is really responsible for this overestimate of global warming is Jim Hansen. He consistently exaggerates all the dangers.

Ah, to be a conservative climate change denier. While real scientists must do all the research and engage in heated debates about just how bad things are going to be, the deniers can rest easy in the bliss of willful ignorance.

I think we need to price carbon; there's no question about it. The way we do it needs to be based on science and not political debates and attacks, and that's why I'm drawing on experts and best practices from around the world.

Admittedly, I possess virtually no expertise in science. That puts me in exactly the same position as most dogmatic environmentalists who want to craft public policy around global warming fears.

Many of the alarmists on global warming, they've got a problem because the science doesn't back them up.

Climate change - for so long an abstract concern for an academic few - is no longer so abstract. Even the Bush administration's Climate Change Science Programme reports 'clear evidence of human influences on the climate system.'

This whole controversy about global warming or even evolution - politicians just don't want to take the time to educate themselves.

We have to be aware that the scientific community throws up tons of different hypotheses and at a certain point we'll find out who was right and who was wrong. But we have to go with the best information right now, which I would claim to be the IPCC reports.

If 98 doctors say my son is ill and needs medication and two say, “No, he doesn’t, he is fine,’ I will go with the 98. It’s common sense-the same with global warming. We go with the majority, the large majority...The key thing now is that since we know this industrial age has created it, let’s get our act together and do everything we can to roll it back.

Victory will be achieved when ... citizens ‘understand’ uncertainties in climate science ... [and] recognition of uncertainties becomes part of the ‘conventional wisdom.’

However useful computer models may be, the one thing they cannot be is evidence. Computer climate models are simply conjectures.

Of course climate changes. Many changes are due to factors over which humans have no control, such as winds, ocean currents, and sun activity. But the liberals want us to believe that climate change is also caused by gases expelled when humans burn so-called fossil fuels.

The hoax is that there are some people who are so arrogant to think that they are so powerful, they can change climate. Man can't change climate.

Well, I think it's clear that the climate is changing. I think reasonable people can differ about how much and how rapidly. But I think it's clear that it's changing and it's clear that humans are a contributing factor.

I think the days of the climate deniers are over. To deny basic science is to risk the trust of the general public.

It's become a running joke among the public, and liberals have lost all credibility when it comes to climate science because their arguments have become so ridiculous and so obviously disconnected from reality.

For someone to say that someone's a skeptic or a climate denier about the climate changing, that's just nonsensical. We see that throughout history. We impact the climate by our activity. How much so is very difficult to determine with respect to our CO2 or carbon footprint, but we obviously do.

Irrationality may be more prevalent in the party of climate denial, but it isn't limited to Republicans.

Just because you're right-wing shouldn't mean you don't believe climate science data. They're unrelated.

There is good evidence that last year's European heat wave was influenced by global warming. It resulted in 26,000 premature deaths and cost $13.5bn.

The only basis for even talking about global warming is the predictions spewed out by computer models. The only quote/unquote "evidence" of global warming is what models are predicting the climate and the weather will be in the next 50 to 100 years. Now, what those models spit out is only as good as the data that's put in, and it's an absolute joke. In terms of science, it's a total joke. There is no warming, global or otherwise!

I'm a skeptic. ...Global Warming it's become a new religion. You're not supposed to be against Global Warming. You have basically no choice. And I tell you how many scientists support that. But the number of scientists is not important. The only thing that's important is if the scientists are correct; that's the important part.

To be clear. I believe in evolution and trust scientists on global warming. Call me crazy.

Climate change is so big that people who study it.. and many do.. need to speak to it. They must present scientific papers, they must appear in public, they must speak to the media and we must hear their voices. In order to get policy right, policymakers.. governments.. need to make decisions based on sound science.