A(z) https://cdn.atlatszo.hu oldal sütiket és más kódokat használ a honlap megfelelő működésének biztosítása céljából, a weboldalon nyújtott felhasználói élmény fokozása érdekében, továbbá ennek segítségével készít elemzéseket az Ön számára releváns, személyre szabott ajánlatok összeállításához. Bővebb információt az adatkezelési tájékoztatónkban talál.
Ferenc Miskolczi’s greenhouse theory: Crippling conservatism or peer review?
Amid allegations leveled by the HVG weekly magazine that atlatszo.hu is an “LMP-affiliated operation,” and comments posted on the Mandiner news portal suggesting that we are a “front” for the LMP party, we cover a story that could hardly be viewed as conforming with the agenda of a green party: A controversial climate theory questioning the validity of widely accepted theories that relate global warming to carbon dioxide emission.
Ferenc Miskolczi, a Hungarian physicist who used to work for NASA, says empirical data proves that carbon dioxide emission has nothing to do with global warming. He does not doubt the existence of global warming, nor belittle the importance of conserving the environment, but stands for the public’s right to a scientifically sound explanation for causes of global warming.
Miskolczi started his career in 1971 at the Institute for Atmospheric Physics of the National Meteorological Services in Hungary, and obtained outstanding results in the area of transmission of infrared radiation. In the ’80s, while working as a research associate at the European Centre for Theoretical Physics, he developed the “Hartcode” model, which is currently being used for calibrating radiation measurement instruments of satellites. In 2001, Miskolczi joined NASA’s Langley Research Center, where he started to develop his climate theory.
Miskolczi’s theory may be bad news for many scientists, politicians, and investors due to its ramifications: Mainstream climatology, which is annually supported by billions of dollars internationally, is fundamentally flawed. Thus, the sophisticated climate models, which occupy a significant portion of the capacity of supercomputers around the world, are wrong as well. Finally, the new industries that emerged as part of the the global effort to curb carbon dioxide emissions may not be serving the good of humankind, as their owners wish the public to believe.
Temperate zones turning into deserts, frequent natural disasters, and rising ocean levels that wipe large cities and entire countries off the map of the world known to us – these are only a few of the predicted consequences by the end of the century of failing to stop global warming. The apocalyptic predictions are not the brainchild of some Hollywood producers, but rather endorsed by the majority of the scientific community and the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Governments spend billions of dollars of taxpayers’ money annually on the global effort to decrease carbon dioxide emissions, commonly believed to be the cause of global warming. Although there are ecosceptics, those who cannot accept predictions of catastrophes due to their personal beliefs, or claim that imposing taxes on carbon dioxide emission adversely impacts the economy, one rarely finds members of the scientific community among them. The majority of climatologists debate only the extent of the adverse effects of greenhouse gas emissions, and the expected time of their materialization.
Not surprisingly, due to the broad consensus concerning the relationship between carbon dioxide emission and global warming, Miskolczi’s revolutionary results were not well-received. His research was shunned and quickly declared heretical, and his greenhouse equations became subject to ridicule and labeled a “mathematical masturbation”. NASA, Miskolczi’s employer at the time, did not consent to the publication of his results that contradicted the theory officially endorsed by IPCC, and discontinued the project. In 2006, Miskolczi resigned his position with NASA to regain his academic and scientific freedom. The International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health rejected the publication of a recent manuscript by Miskolczi; apparently, the editor preferred a single unfavourable referee’s report over two favourable ones.
In January 2011, the Geodetic and Geophysical Research Institute of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences (HAS) commenced a 12-month project for a critical examination of Ferenc Miskolczi’s results, aimed at either validating or disproving his theory. While the attacks on Miskolczi’s work have received broad coverage in the media, this initiative unfortunately seems to have gone unnoticed and unreported.
Atlatszo.hu takes no position in the scientific and political debate related to Miskolczi’s theory, nor does it purport to have the expertise to do so. By publishing the rejected manuscript of Miskolczi, the referees’ reports, and the minutes of a meeting at the Geodetic and Geophysical Research Institute concerning Miskolczi’s theory, we are only discharging our duty: to inform the public and allow open and informed debate about what we believe to be matters of public concern and interest.
(Independent Hungarian filmmaker Sándor Cs. Nagy is shooting a documentary about Miskolczi’s life and theories – if you are interested in the project, please contact Szonja Miskolczi at szonjamiskolczi [at] yahoo [dot] com)