Ivy League geologist Dr. Robert Giegengack, former chair of Department of Earth and Environmental Science at the University of Pennsylvania, spoke out in 2007 against fears of rising CO2 impacts promoted by Gore and others.
Ivy League geologist Dr. Robert Giegengack, the chair of Department of Earth and Environmental Science at the University of Pennsylvania, spoke out against fears of rising CO2 impacts promoted by Gore and others.
does not even consider global warming among the top ten environmental problems.
"In terms of [global warming's] capacity to cause the human species harm, I don't think it makes it into the top 10," Giegengack
said in an interview in the May/June 2007 issue of the Pennsylvania Gazette. (LINK) Giegengack
also noted "for most of Earth's history, the globe has been warmer than it has been for the last 200 years.
It has rarely been cooler.
As temperature rises, CO2 rises, and vice versa," Giegengack
"It's hard for us to say that CO2 drives temperature.
It's easier to say temperature drives CO2," he
added. (LINK) "The driving mechanism is exactly the opposite of what Al Gore claims, both in his
film and in that book.
It's the temperature that, through those 650,000 years, controlled the CO2; not the CO2 that controlled the temperature," he
"Certain 'feedback loops' naturally control the levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.
A warmer temperature drives gases out of solution in the ocean and releases them," he
"[Today, humans] are putting 6.5 billion tons of fossil-fuel carbon into the atmosphere, and only 3.5 billion is staying there, so 3 billion tons is going somewhere else.
In the past, when the Earth's climate rose, CO2 came out of the ocean, the soils, and the permafrost.
Today as temperatures rise, excess CO2 is instead going into those and other reservoirs.
This reversed flux is very important.
Because of this, if we reduced the rate at which we put carbon into the atmosphere, it won't reduce the concentration in the atmosphere; CO2 is just going to come back out of these reservoirs … If we were to stop manufacturing CO2 tomorrow, we wouldn't see the effects of that for generations," Giegengack