By Tom Quiner

Dr. Ivar Giaever

Dr. Ivar Giaever

Dr. Ivar Giaever is an accomplished scientist.

He won a Nobel prize in physics in 1973 for research on “tunneling phenomena in solids.”

I have no idea what that means. Here’s how his bio in Wikipedia states it:

“The work that led to Giaever’s Nobel Prize was performed at General Electric in 1960. Following on Esaki’s discovery of electron tunnelling insemiconductors in 1958, Giaever showed that tunnelling also took place in superconductors, demonstrating tunnelling through a very thin layer of oxidesurrounded on both sides by metal in a superconducting or normal state.[5] Giaever’s experiments demonstrated the existence of an energy gap in superconductors, one of the most important predictions of the BCS theory of superconductivity, which had been developed in 1957.[6] Giaever’s experimental demonstration of tunnelling in superconductors stimulated the theoretical physicist Brian Josephson to work on the phenomenon, leading to his prediction of the Josephson effect in 1962. Esaki and Giaever shared half of the 1973 Nobel Prize, and Josephson received the other half.[1]

Got that? Dr. Giaever is a bright man.

He takes his science seriously, going so far as to publicly opposing Louisiana’s creationism law which allows public schools to use, among other things, materials which question the theory of evolution.

I mention that in light of Dr. Giaever’s recent politically-incorrect remarks regarding global warming and climate change:

“I would say that basically global warming is a non-problem.”

Keep in mind that Dr. Giaever was a passionate and public supporter of Barack Obama in 2008, signing a letter along with 70 other Nobel winners stating that the…

“… country urgently needs a visionary leader. Senator Barack Obama is such a leader, and we urge you to join us in supporting him.”

Times have changed.

Regarding Mr. Obama’s embrace of climate change theology, Dr. Giaever retorts:

“I say this to Obama: Excuse me, Mr. President, but you’re wrong. Dead wrong.”

He was just warming up …

“Global warming really has become a new religion. Because you cannot discuss it. It’s not proper. It is like the Catholic Church.”

I don’t know if that’s some sort of swipe at the Catholic Church, but it is true that climate change science seems to have morphed into a religion. That’s why I always describe the subject as the “theology of climate change.”

The doctor points out that there has been no global warming for some 17 years according to satellite data. Worse, scientists have been caught “fiddling” the data:

“When you have a theory and the theory does not agree with the experiment then you have to cut out the theory. You were wrong with the theory.”

As this blog has reported, the statistic that 97% of climate scientists believe we have a man-made climate-change crisis is a myth.

Dr. Giaever is but one of thousands of dissenters within the scientific community.


  1. violetwisp on July 8, 2015 at 3:56 pm

    Isn’t it a shame that your pope doesn’t agree with him?

    • quinersdiner on July 8, 2015 at 4:05 pm

      I suppose my answer is yes, Violet. However, the Pope makes it clear that other viewpoints need to be considered, and that we should follow the science. He also believes that “natural ecology” is preceded by “human ecology.” Thanks for writing. I still plan on responding to your query the other day. Thanks!

      • violetwisp on July 8, 2015 at 4:07 pm

        Thank you, I look forward to it.

  2. oarubio on July 8, 2015 at 5:16 pm

    The encyclical states that the Church does not endorse any particular plan of action. The issue needs to be researched further and only 4 paragraphs out of 246 dealt with climate change of any sort.

  3. oarubio on July 8, 2015 at 5:17 pm

    Incidentally, when the pope is not speaking on matters of morals or faith, we may politely engage in discussion!

  4. labman57 on July 8, 2015 at 5:43 pm

    One of the great misconceptions of the scientifically-illiterate is the assumption that every scientist is an expert in all areas of science, somewhat akin to the Professor on Gilligan’s Island.

    The “expert” opinions of scientists who study quantum mechanics, or astrophysics, or nuclear chemistry, or plate tectonics are not going to have the same gravitas as the conclusions of scientists who actually have spent their careers studying atmospheric chemistry or climatology.

    It would be no different than if you had been diagnosed with a malignant brain tumor, and so you sought out the expertise of several oncologists and neurosurgeons to discuss your options … but then a couple of proctologists overhearing the conversations gave their two cents and insisted that their opinions carried as much weight as those of the consulted doctors.

    It would make no sense to give much credence to the advise given by the proctologists … unless your head was lodged up your ass.

    • quinersdiner on July 8, 2015 at 10:13 pm

      Good point. The Zimmerman/Doran survey which produced the famous 97% consensus figure of scientists in favor of man-made climate change failed to survey scientists in associated fields:

      √solar scientists,

      √space scientists,




      √and astronomers.

  5. […] Nobel scientist scoffs at climate change theology ( […]

Leave a Comment