Tag: global warming

Why The Weather Warming Is Good For Humans

Notice I didn’t say climate because global warming is a lie, a money laundering tool that is losing steam (see what I did there?)

Anyway, from Watts Up With That, why warming up is better than cooling.

Here in England this spring, there was dry, sunny weather through most of March, followed by gentle showers in April. And here is the opening couplet of Geoffrey Chaucer’s Tales of Caunterbury, written more than six centuries ago in 1387:

From the medieval climate optimum to the modern climate optimum, the weather in these islands has changed scarcely at all. The drought of March, the sweet April showers, the birdsong day and night, the bursting forth of primroses, bluebells, daffodils and other spring flowers, all are today just as Chaucer described them in the Middle Ages.

The wine-dark sea

One can even go back to Homer, in the 8th Century BC, who talked of the Mediterranean as “the wine-dark sea”. And here am I, almost three millennia later, recently recovered from a long illness caused by defective medication with no active ingredient in it, having climbed to the 1230ft summit of the Akamas peninsula in Cyprus, doing a Canute and challenging the wine-dark sea not to rise. The sea was wine-dark in Homer’s time. It is still wine-dark today.

Where, then, are the drastic changes in climate and consequent catastrophes and cataclysms so luridly predicted by the climate Communists? Where are the mass extinctions? Why is the climate much as it was in the Middle Ages? Why are ten times as many dying of cold as of heat? Why are crop yields at record highs? Why is the planet greening so fast?

Cold, not heat, is the real killer

Silvio Canto Jr., at the splendid American Thinker blog, reminds us that “Earth Day” began on Lenin’s birthday, 22 April. He sets out some examples of the half-witted predictions made by the totalitarian far Left in the early 1970s, when the “green holy day” started:

Paul Ehrlich, in a 1969 essay entitled Eco-Catastrophe!, wrote: “Most of the people who are going to die in the greatest cataclysm in the history of man have already been born. By [1975] some experts feel that food shortages will have escalated the present level of world hunger and starvation into famines of unbelievable proportions. Other experts, more optimistic, think the ultimate food-population collision will not occur until the decade of the 1980s.”

In April 1970 he wrote in Mademoiselle: “Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make. The death rate will increase until at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next ten years”.

In the 1970 Earth Day issue of The Progressive, he sketched out his most alarmist scenario, telling readers that between 1980 and 1989 some 4 billion people, including 65 million Americans, would perish in what he called the “Great Die-Off.”

In the May 1970 issue of Audubon, he wrote that DDT and other chlorinated hydrocarbons “may have substantially reduced the life expectancy of people born since 1945.” He said that Americans born since 1946 now had a life expectancy of only 49 years, and he predicted that if current patterns continued this expectancy would reach 42 years by 1980, when it might level out. According to the most recent CDC report, life expectancy in the US is 78.6 years.

That year he predicted that “air pollution…is certainly going to take hundreds of thousands of lives in the next few years alone”. He predicted that 200,000 Americans would die by 1973 during “smog disasters” in New York and Los Angeles.

Five years later he predicted that “Since more than nine-tenths of the original tropical rainforests will be removed in most areas within the next 30 years or so [i.e., by 2005], it is expected that half of the organisms in these areas will vanish with it.”

Kenneth Watt, an ecologist, said: “By the year 2000, if present trends continue, we will be using up crude oil at such a rate … that there won’t be any more crude oil. You’ll drive up to the pump and say, ‘Fill ’er up, buddy,’ and he’ll say, ‘I’m very sorry, there isn’t any.’” Global oil production in 2024, at about 95 million barrels per day, was double the global oil output of 48 million barrels per day at the time of the first Earth Day in 1970.

He gave a speech predicting a pending Ice Age: “The world has been chilling sharply for about 20 years. If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an Ice Age.”

He also told Time that “At the present rate of nitrogen buildup, it’s only a matter of time before light will be filtered out of the atmosphere and none of our land will be usable.”

Barry Commoner, a Washington University biologist, wrote in the Earth Day issue of Environment: “We are in an environmental crisis that threatens the survival of this nation, and of the world as a suitable place of human habitation.”

He also predicted that decaying organic pollutants would consume all of the oxygen in America’s rivers, suffocating freshwater fish.

George Wald, a Harvard biologist, estimated that “Civilization will end within 15 or 30 years [by 1985 or 2000] unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind.”

The New York Times, on its editorial page the day after the first Earth Day, wrote: “Man must stop pollution and conserve his resources, not merely to enhance existence but to save the race from intolerable deterioration and possible extinction.”

Denis Hayes, the chief organizer for Earth Day, wrote in the Spring 1970 issue of The Living Wilderness: “It is already too late to avoid mass starvation.”

Peter Gunter, a professor at North Texas State University, wrote in 1970: “Demographers agree almost unanimously on the following grim timetable: by 1975 widespread famines will begin in India; these will spread by 1990 to include all of India, Pakistan, China, the Near East and Africa. By the year 2000, or conceivably sooner, South and Central America will exist under famine conditions… By the year 2000, thirty years from now, the entire world, with the exception of Western Europe, North America, and Australia, will be in famine.” The prediction of famine in South America has come to pass only in Venezuela and only due to socialism, not due to environmental reasons.

Life Magazine reported in January 1970: “Scientists have solid experimental and theoretical evidence to support…the following predictions: In a decade, urban dwellers will have to wear gas masks to survive air pollution … by 1985 air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching Earth by one half.”

Harrison Brown, a member of the National Academy of Sciences, published a chart in Scientific American that looked at metal reserves and estimated that humanity would totally run out of copper shortly after 2000, while lead, zinc, tin, gold, and silver would be gone before 1990.

Senator Gaylord Nelson wrote in Look: “Dr. S. Dillon Ripley, secretary of the Smithsonian Institute, believes that in 25 years somewhere between 75 and 80 percent of all the species of living animals will be extinct.”

None of these lurid fantasies, mere pretexts for totalitarian control measures, has materialized.

While I have been ill, I have been quietly working on our team’s climatological research. For an update on our result, now published as an extended abstract after peer review, search YouTube for “Tom Nelson Monckton”.

I have also had long and detailed conversations with two Fellows of the Royal Society, who are justifiably concerned at the Society’s propensity to promulgate only the official narrative on questions such as global warming and are preparing to do something about it.

We have already notched up a useful initial victory. Several Communist Fellows had decided that now that Elon Musk is for some reason no longer a hero of the Left they should call a meeting of the Royal Society to strip him of his Fellowship.

Record Rain In California, But Watch For a Water Shortage This Year Due To Mismanagement Regulations

Remember the Delta Smelt?

Here’s a refresher:

The Controversy

When delta smelt were listed as a threatened species, the biggest cause of their population decline was identified as reduced freshwater flow into the estuary. This makes the water saltier, which leads to dehydration. This is similar to the reason humans shouldn’t drink saltwater when they’re thirsty. Because of this, a recovery plan was made that mandated increased freshwater flow for the smelt, which meant less water for agriculture.

They were willing to cause environmental damage to agriculture for a relatively unremarkable fish, all for political reasons.

Record Rain

The net is a water shortage. It was blamed on global warming, but that just shows the level of lowness they will go to in California for political gain.

Now, with the flooding that happened yesterday, there is an abundance of water, but since it’s regulated against the farmers, it will be diverted away and crops will likely suffer later in the year.

An intense, long-lasting atmospheric river is moving across California — bringing widespread power outages and the potential for mudslides and life-threatening flooding as it dumps heavy rain and snow. Follow our live coverage here. This is what’s happening:

• Rare high flood risk persists: A firehose of rain has parked over Southern California, including Los Angeles, worsening the high risk of flooding throughout Monday. Torrential rainfall and “locally catastrophic” flooding is possible in Orange County through Tuesday, according to the National Weather Service office in San Diego.

In the end, climate change will be blamed for what was government mismanagement and stupidity.

It’s just another step in the climate staircase that is built on government regulations. In fact, if they’d stop laundering money through yet another scare tactic to distract the population, there would be no water shortage since nature took care of it already. 

Unfortunately, California is the canary in the coal mines of the US. This craziness needs to be stomped out and put to death before it fully infects the rest of the country.

Today’s ‘Climate Crisis’ Is a Fairy Tale

For the past 35 years, the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has warned us that emissions from the burning of fossil fuels, predominantly carbon dioxide (CO2), are causing dangerous global warming.  This myth is blindly accepted — even by many of my science colleagues who know virtually nothing about climate.  As a scientist, my purpose here is to help expose this fairy tale.

The global warming story is not a benign fantasy.  It is seriously damaging Western economies.  In January 2021, the White House ridiculously declared that “climate change is the most serious existential threat to humanity.”  From there, America went from energy independence back to energy dependence.  Another consequence has been the appearance of numerous companies whose goal is to “sequester CO2” as well as “sequester carbon” from our atmosphere.  However, this so-called “solution” is scientifically impossible.  Life on Earth is based on carbon!  CO2 is plant food, not a pollutant!

Generations have been brainwashed for decades into believing this imaginary “climate crisis,” from kindergarten through college, and in mainstream media and social media.  Indoctrinated young teachers feel comfortable teaching this misinformation to students.  Dishonest climate scientists feel justified in spreading disinformation because they need governmental support for salaries and research.

The evidence contradicting the climate apocalypse is vast.  Some comes from analysis of Greenland and Antarctica ice, in which air trapped at various depths reveals CO2 levels of past climate.  Proxy records from marine sediment, dust (from erosion, wind-blown deposition of sediments), and ice cores provide a record of past sea levels, ice volume, seawater temperature, and global atmospheric temperatures.

From his seminal work while a prisoner of war during WWI, Serbian mathematician Milutin Milankovitch explained how climate is influenced by variations in the Earth’s asymmetric orbit, axial tilt, and rotational wobble — each going through cycles lasting as long as 120,000 years.

It is widely recognized that Glacial Periods of about 95,000 years, interspersed with Interglacial Periods of  approximately 25,000 years, correspond with Milankovitch Cycles.  Multiple incursions of glaciers occurred during the Pleistocene, an epoch lasting from about 2.6 million to 11,700 years ago, when Earth’s last Glacial Period ended.  Around 24,000 years ago, present-day Lake Erie was covered with ice a mile thick.  

Within each Interglacial Period, there’ve been warming periods, or “Mini-Summers.”  For example, within the current Holocene Interglacial, there have been warmer periods known as the Minoan (1500–1200 B.C.), Roman (250 B.C.–A.D. 400), and Medieval (A.D. 900–1300).  Our Modern Warming Period began with the waning of the Little Ice Age (1300–1850).  Today’s Mini-Summer is colder so far than all previous Mini-Summers of the last 8,500 years.

How did CO2 get blamed for global warming?  French physicist Joseph Fourier (1820s) proposed that energy from sunlight must be balanced by energy radiated back into space.  Irish physicist John Tyndall (1850s) performed laboratory experiments on “greenhouse gases” (GHGs), including water vapor; he proposed that CO2 elicited an important effect on temperature.  However, it’s impossible to do appropriate experiments — unless the roof of your laboratory is at least six miles high.  Swedish chemist Svante Arrhenius (1896) proposed that “warming is proportional to the logarithm of CO2 concentration.”  Columbia University geochemist Wallace Broecker (1975) and Columbia University adjunct professor James Hansen (1981) wrote oft-cited articles in Science magazine, both overstating the perils of CO2 causing dangerous global warming — without providing scientific proof.

Most of Earth’s energy comes from the sun.  Absorption of sunlight causes molecules of objects or surfaces to vibrate faster, increasing their temperature.  This energy is then re-radiated by land and oceans as longwave, infrared radiation (heat).  Princeton University physicist Will Happer defines a GHG as that which absorbs negligible incoming sunlight but captures a substantial fraction of thermal radiation as it is re-radiated from Earth’s surface and atmospheric GHGs back into space.

The gases of nitrogen, oxygen and argon — constituting 78%, 21%, and 0.93%, respectively, of the atmosphere — show negligible absorption of thermal radiation and therefore are not GHGs.  Important GHGs include water (as high as 7% in humid tropics and as little as 1% in frigid climates), CO2 (0.042%, or 420 parts per million [ppm] by volume), methane (0.00017%), and nitrous oxide (0.0000334%, or 334 ppm).Water vapor (clouds) has at least a hundred times greater warming effect on Earth’s temperature than all other GHGs combined.

As atmospheric CO2 increases, its GHG effect decreases: CO2’s warming effect is 1.5°C between zero and 20 ppm, 0.3°C between 20 and 40 ppm, and 0.15°C between 40 and 60 ppm.  Every doubling of atmospheric CO2 from today’s levels decreases radiation back into space by a mere 1%.  For most of the past 800,000 years, Earth’s atmospheric CO2 has ranged between about 180 ppm and 320 ppm; below 150 ppm, Earth’s plants could not exist, and all life would be extinguished.

Today’s global atmospheric CO2 levels are ~420 ppm.  Even at these levels, plants are “partially CO2-starved.”  In fact, standard procedures for commercial greenhouse growers include elevating CO2 to 800­–1200 ppm; this enhances growth and crop yield ~20–50%.  As shown by satellite since 1978, increased atmospheric CO2 has helped “green” the Earth by more than 15 percent, substantially enhancing crop production.

If global atmospheric CO2 was ~280 ppm in 1750, and it’s ~420 ppm today, what’s the source of this 140-ppm increase?  Scientists estimate that human-associated industrial emissions might have contributed 135 ppm — with “natural causes” accounting for the remaining 5 ppm.

In Earth’s history, the highest levels of atmospheric CO2 (6,000–9,000 ppm) occurred about 550–450 million years ago, which caused plant life to flourish.  CO2 levels in older nuclear submarines routinely operated at 7,000 ppm, whereas newer subs keep CO2 in the 2,000- to 5,000-ppm range.  Meanwhile, ice core data over the last 800,000 years show no correlation between global warming or cooling cycles and atmospheric CO2 levels.

CO2 in our lungs reaches 40,000–50,000 ppm, which induces us to take our next breath.  Each human exhales about 2.3 pounds of CO2 per day, which means Earth’s 8 billion people produce daily 18.4 billion pounds of CO2.  But humans represent only 1/40 of all CO2-excreting life on Earth.  Multiplying 18.4 billion pounds by 40 gives us 736 billion pounds of CO2 per day.  This approximates the overall CO2 excreted by the total animal and fungal biomass on the planet.

Daily emissions from worldwide industry in 2020 were estimated to be 16 million metric tons of CO2 equivalents.  If one metric ton is 2,200 pounds, then “total industrial emissions” amount to 35,200,000,000 (35.2 billion) pounds of CO2 per day.  This means that the entire animal and fungal biomass (736 billion pounds) puts out more than 20 times as much CO2 as all industrial emissions (35.2 billion pounds)!

Can any clear-thinking person comprehend the facts above and still create a company with idiotic plans to “sequester CO2” or “sequester carbon”?  Scientifically, “net zero” and “carbon footprint” are meaningless terms.  There is no “climate crisis.”

If you try to find these facts on the web, good luck!  Out of every 10 hits on any climate topic, you’ll be lucky to find one or two sites with truthful scientific data.

The door of a nearby classroom displays a poster of Abraham Lincoln with the caption: “Don’t believe everything you read on the internet.”  It is advice that our 16th president surely would have offered — had he lived to see the rise of this global warming quasi-religion.

story – source

No Amount Of Subsidies Will Ever Make A Wind/Solar Electricity System Economically Feasible

More COP28 lying….the math never works.

The COP 28 climate confab opened today in Dubai. Some 70,000 true believers in the energy transition are said to be gathering. And not one of them appears to be either willing or able to do the simple arithmetic that shows that this can’t possibly work.

So far, no country that has made a commitment to “net zero” has officially backed off. (Argentina may soon become the first.). Things proceed as if all that is needed is to build sufficient wind and solar generation facilities, until eventually you have enough of them to meet demand. But that’s not how this works. The absurdity becomes more obvious every day. Can somebody please tell the poor people making fools of themselves in Dubai?

Let’s consider the latest from Germany. According to Statista here, Germany consumed 511.59 TWh of electricity in 2021 (latest year given, although the numbers have recently changed very little from year to year). Divide by 8760 (number of hours in a year) and you learn that Germany’s average usage of electricity is 58.3 GW. So, can you just build 58.3 GW of wind and solar generators to supply Germany with electricity?

Absolutely not. In fact, Germany already has way more wind and solar electricity generation capacity than the 58.3 GW, but can’t come anywhere near getting all its electricity from those sources. As of June 2023 Germany had 59.3 GW of generation capacity from wind turbines alone, and (as of end 2022) another 67.4 GW of generation capacity from solar panels. The total of the two is 126.7 GW — which would supply more than double Germany’s usage at noon on a sunny and breezy June 21. But, according to Clean Energy Wire here, through the first three quarters of 2023, the percent of its electricity that Germany got from wind and solar was only 52%. Capacity seemingly sufficient to supply double the usage in fact only supplies half. That’s because the supply does not come at the same time as the demand, and the wind/solar generation system provides no mechanism to shift the supply to a time to meet the demand.

And why doesn’t Germany just double the amount of its wind/solar generation, so that those sources would go from supplying 52% of usage to 100%. Because it doesn’t work that way. If they double the wind and solar generation, then on the sunny/breezy June 21 mid-day they will now have over 250 GW of electricity generation — more than 4 times what they need — so they will have to discard or give away the rest. But on a calm night in January, they will still have nothing and need full backup from some other source. Multiplying the wind/solar generation capacity by 10 or even 100 (referred to as “overbuilding”) will increase the costs of the system exponentially, but will never be enough to keep the lights on all the time. Or you can try energy storage to save up the surpluses to cover the deficits, but that also multiplies the costs of the system exponentially. For more than you will ever want to know about energy storage and its costs, read my December 2022 energy storage report, “The Energy Storage Conundrum.”

Read The Whole Thing Here at WUWT

COP28 Update: Elitist John Kerry Shows Off Arrogance And Dishonesty……..And Farts While Speaking

He and Al Gore expose that it’s a scam for money, while the actual Environment is producing record cold.

Selling global warming may prove more difficult, as Germany just experienced a record-breaking level of snowfall for any December in recorded history. Meanwhile, Cop28 president says there is ‘no science’ behind demands for phase-out of fossil fuels.

Failure theaters continue to play in Dubai during the United Nations Climate Conference of Parties (CoP28).

To begin with, getting to the United Arab Emirates (UAE) was more challenging than normal for some participants…as Germany experienced a record-breaking level of snowfall for any December in recorded history.

The airport in Munich resumed limited operations Sunday morning after being closed for nearly a day because of record snowfall that disrupted transportation across the region.

About 17 inches of snow fell in parts of southern Germany on Saturday, an unusually large amount for early December, and what local news media reported was the biggest daily snowfall in Munich in December since records had been kept.

Then, he lets out the only gas that is dangerous while making specious claims.

Al Gore gets in on the hoax:

In a desperate bid to remain relevant, former Vice President Al Gore slammed the UAE, saying its position as overseer of international negotiations on global warming this year was an abuse of public trust.

The comments, made to Reuters in an interview on the sidelines of the conference in Dubai, reflected skepticism among some delegates that COP28 President Sultan al-Jaber, head of the UAE’s national oil company ADNOC, can be an honest broker of a climate deal.

“They are abusing the public’s trust by naming the CEO of one of the largest and least responsible oil companies in the world as head of the COP,” Gore said.

But, the truth comes out anyway:

There is “no science” that says the world should phase out fossil fuels to curb global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, according to Sultan Al Jaber, the president of the COP28 climate summit, the Guardian and the Centre for Climate Reporting report.

“There is no science out there, or no scenario out there, that says that the phase-out of fossil fuel is what’s going to achieve 1.5C,” Al Jaber said in an online event last month, the remarks from which the Guardian reported on December 3, days after the COP28 summit in Dubai began on November 30.

Al Jaber made those comments in response to questions from Mary Robinson, the chair of the Elders group and a former UN special envoy for climate change.

Story

Climate Change Truths

It’s hard to believe that the media/Government/grifter group has been able to keep the lie going this long. Dear Greta, the world didn’t end in 2023 and you have been used like every other tool the climate elitist’s have used. The truth is that it is about money and power by claiming catastrophe after catastrophe that never happen.

Let’s start with Germany, who shut down nuclear power, is cutting natural gas and coal and wonders why their energy costs are skyrocketing.

German Greens in Crisis, Plummet 40% In Opinion Polls as Anger Mounts Over Bans, Scandals

Being the media darlings has not prevented the German Greens from collapsing in the public opinion polls. 40% of green voters have taken their approval away since it peaked in popularity at 23%. 

A series of unpopular, draconian policy proposals along with cronyism scandals have resulted in a body blow for Green Party popularity in Germany.

Accusations of cronyism have surfaced after a top advisor of Green Economics Minister Robert Habeck awarded state contracts to family members and other close associates.

Secretary for Climate Affairs Dr. Patrick Graichen is accused of having awarded government contracts to a research institute run by multiple members of his family. He also appointed his best man to head the German Energy Agency.

The woes for Graichen may also be compounding as “a suspicion of violations of citation rules” regarding his doctoral thesis has surfaced.

Thanks to Woosterman for those images, and 90 Miles from Tyranny for this one.

Like believing that you can live on sustainable energy while it is a ruse to launder money, like the Ukraine.

And for the number one liar and grifter of this scam, the hero of Tim O’Reilly, James Governor and Tom Raftery. All people I had to deal with who spread these lies. I don’t think even they believed all of this.

NASA – CO2 Now NOT Behind Climate Change

I was glad to hear that the truth couldn’t be hidden behind the curtain. I was equally disturbed that the same idiots now have a new villain, clouds. Of all the nonsense.

I guess that CO2 is running out of steam because the truth that it is a plant nutrient is not the culprit. We all know the real reason for it is to grift money of the government and billionaires, or to grift it into the pockets of the politicians.

Anyway, here’s your study with charts and facts courtesy of WUWT, a blog you should follow for actual climate facts.

There is a lot more than this, but you get the drift. They are making it up like they have all along.

CO2 is Innocent but Clouds are Guilty.  New Science has Created a “Black Swan Event”**

Our tax dollars have been at work with NASA for the last 20+ years putting satellites in orbit to detect and measure the “CO2 effect” on Global Warming, GW.  After 20 years, the CERES satellite (and others) has discovered that cloud reduction is the major effect on GW for those 20 years. Two papers published in 2021 reach this conclusion, Dübal and Vahrenholt,  (2) and. Loeb, Gregory et al  (3)  These new papers do claim some sign of CO2 effect (and other greenhouse gases) on GW; but the papers show the dominate effect on GW for those 20 years was the cloud reduction effect (albedo reduction- warming).   This paper will show that the observed cloud reduction will account for all the GW in those 20 years and back to 1975, leaving no GW left over for the CO2 effect on GW. Cloud reduction is albedo reduction, (albedo: color of the earth, black, 0.0, is hot and white, 1.0, is cool).  Another recently published paper (2021) by Goode et al (4) measuring earth’s albedo from moon shine also reports the same reduction in albedo as the CERES data of both Dübal and Loeb:  one can only conclude that for 20 years of data the albedo change is real.   Why is albedo change important?  Because the IPCC theory of CO2 effect on GW assumes that the earth’s albedo has been constant (or not changed much) and CO2 (and other greenhouse gases) thru Radiative Forcing effect GW.  The resent satellite data says this is not true.   Cloud cover changes are best documented at “Climate and Clouds”(5) with links to the data source at “Climate Explorer” (6).  “Climate and Clouds” conclude that cloud change only accounts for 25% of the GW.  This paper will show an improved analysis of “Climate and Clouds” data agrees with the CERES data of Dübal and Loeb that cloud reduction is accounting for most if not all of the warming over CERES’s 20 years.  Figures 1 and 2 show a graphic representation of what Dübal and Loeb observed in the CERES data and what was expected from IPCC Radiative Forcing, RF, theory.  The shape (slopes) of the observed and expected are entirely different but the increase in the missing energy (Earths Energy Imbalance, EEI) is the same.  The missing energy, EEI, is used to warm the earth though the energy balance equation:

And more that there is no climate emergency, (only a money emergency):

Over 1000 Scientists Show There Is No Climate Emergency – Previous 97% Claim Was Bogus

Perhaps it is time to consider if the World Climate Declaration, which has been signed by 1,200 climate scientists and related professionals, may be something to seriously consider, promote, and act on. In the document, these scientists affirm that there is “no climate emergency.”

The political fiction that humans cause most or all climate change and the claim that the science behind this notion is ‘settled’, has been dealt a savage blow by the publication of a ‘World Climate Declaration (WCD)’ signed by over 1,100 scientists and professionals. There is no climate emergency, say the authors, who are drawn from across the world and led by the Norwegian physics Nobel Prize laureate Professor Ivar Giaever. Climate science is said to have degenerated into a discussion based on beliefs, not on sound self-critical science.

The scale of the opposition to modern day ‘settled’ climate science is remarkable, given how difficult it is in academia to raise grants for any climate research that departs from the political orthodoxy. (A full list of the signatories is available here.) Another lead author of the declaration, Professor Richard Lindzen, has called the current climate narrative “absurd”, but acknowledged that trillions of dollars and the relentless propaganda from grant-dependent academics and agenda-driven journalists currently says it is not absurd.

It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that this has been about money from the beginning. Like all political maneuvering, you create a crisis that only you can fix.

Europe bought it and is now held hostage by Russia, as a former president predicted. The USA is desperately trying to hamstring our economy with false claims about the climate. Look behind it to find the source of these falsehoods, money, power and control.

(from Moonbattery)

THE STUDY

The political fiction that humans cause most or all climate change and the claim that the science behind this notion is ‘settled’, has been dealt a savage blow by the publication of a ‘World Climate Declaration (WCD)’ signed by over 1,100 scientists and professionals.

The scale of the opposition to modern day ‘settled’ climate science is remarkable, given how difficult it is in academia to raise grants for any climate research that departs from the political orthodoxy. (A full list of the signatories is available here.) Another lead author of the declaration, Professor Richard Lindzen, has called the current climate narrative “absurd”, but acknowledged that trillions of dollars and the relentless propaganda from grant-dependent academics and agenda-driven journalists currently says it is not absurd.

Having discarded the use of empirical evidence, pseudo-scientific priests of the climate cult who are paid by Big Government to prop up global warming ideology rely on models. These models find whatever they are designed to find, and according to the WCD, “are not remotely plausible as global policy tools.”

Yet leftist governments exploit them to waste $trillions and inflict crushing regulations. Their deranged objective is to enforce a “carbon-free” economy, despite it being unclear that CO2 is a major factor in climate fluctuation.

CO2 DECLARED BENEFICIAL, NOT A POISON

I had to work with climatards who bought into Carbon poisoning the atmosphere, to the point of them wanting to tax it a dollar a pound. They and their co-founder went under. I knew for lack of facts. They were always begging us for money so there you have your real reason. They and the other green analysts would gladly jet to the conferences all around the world, like their hero’s who fly private jets to climate conferences.

“More CO2 is beneficial for nature, greening the Earth; additional CO2 in the air has promoted growth in global plant biomass. It is also good for agriculture, increasing the yield of crops worldwide.”

The Declaration also observes there is no statistical evidence that global warming is intensifying natural disasters, as the liberal media hysterically shrieks.

“There is no climate emergency,” the Declaration goes on. “We strongly oppose the harmful and unrealistic net-zero CO2 policy proposed for 2050,” it says, adding that the aim of global policy should be “prosperity for all” by providing reliable and affordable energy at all times.

CONVINCING THE CLIMATE WORSHIPERS

There is no telling someone who to worship. We all worship something and those people selected both money and the Earth. Good luck with that one. It ranks so far down the list with ordinary people that even scaring them isn’t working. The statue of Liberty isn’t under water, Greenland ice is growing, Florida is still here and there is no change in the water level at Plymouth Rock.

I don’t try to convince them because you can’t talk to someone who has declared their hill to die on.

EUROPE STEPPING ON IT’S OWN DICK

Here is a list of their progress down the toilet of energy shortage because of green polices and environmental policies by their government. – Courtesy of WUWT.

  1. Very low French nuclear availability (EDF recently scaled back its output guidance for 2023 to 300-330TWh and is now facing cooling issues that are impacting an already weak 2022 availability)
  2. Historically low hydro storage levels from Scandinavia to Iberia (given widespread drought conditions)
  3. Thermal plant closures across Western Europe (across ageing coal, nuclear & gas plants)
  4. Fuel supply logistics driven by a combination of very low Rhine water levels (e.g. impacting barge coal delivery to German power stations) & logistical issues driven by the Russian conflict
  5. Periods of low wind & solar output where the factors above are driving a deficit in residual generation.

The combination of these factors is pushing the power crisis onto centre stage.

Power crisis now driving the gas crisis

Europe is short molecules of gas across the next 3 years. Given lack of any material supply response across this period (in the absence of a return to higher Russian flows), there are three demand side reduction options to balance the market:

  1. Industrial demand (already facing destruction of ~15% so far in 2022 due to higher prices)
  2. Power sector demand
  3. Residential & commercial demand (the sector that governments are most likely to try and protect in case of rationing).

Normally very high gas prices would incentivise reduced demand from the power sector. But going forward Europe is now short electrons as well a molecules.  And the marginal source of incremental electrons comes from burning molecules.

In other words in order to keep the lights on, Europe has no alternative but to burn more gas, aside from intervention to reduce power demand which may also be coming.

A 2020 scientific analysis revealed that “models overpredict warming in every target observational analog, in most cases significantly so, and the average differences between models and observations are statistically significant.”

Scientist Ross McKitrick calls out errors of modelers that exaggerate future temperature increases.

“I get it that modeling the climate is incredibly difficult, and no one faults the scientific community for finding it a tough problem to solve,” writes McKitrick. “But we are all living with the consequences of climate modelers stubbornly using generation after generation of models that exhibit too much surface and tropospheric warming, in addition to running grossly exaggerated forcing scenarios.” (Forcing is the mechanism by which greenhouse gases warm the atmosphere.)

I earlier quoted the 97% of scientists agree there is global warming. I put this near the end because no one believes it, even those claiming that lie. It’s useful life is over and has been exposed.

Just to show how much the rest of the world and the top polluters care about this issue, look at China and India. Good job there Nancy.

China Scraps (Already Scant) Climate Cooperation Over Pelosi Taiwan Visit

The Chinese Communist Party was very displeased with U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-CA) well-publicized visit to Taiwan reaffirming the United States’ commitment to the island’s continued independence from mainland China. To demonstrate its displeasure—in addition to the usual rattling of sabers, sending of new naval ships into the area, flying jets into Taiwanese airspace, and test-firing missiles into the sea around the island—China announced it was suspending cooperation with the United States in the fight against climate change. Heaven forbid!

The article goes on to say:

China played the rest of the world’s leaders like a drum during the negotiations for the Paris Climate Agreement in 2015. In an agreement that included no mandatory reductions except what countries imposed on themselves, all China would concede was that it expected its emissions to peak by 2030, maybe 2035. Climate negotiators and leaders of environmental NGOs hailed this as a historic step. Climate realists such as I asked: Peak at what level? Chinese Communist Party leaders smirked behind their hands at their PR coup. Our question has gone unanswered to this day.

This is all supported by working people who pay excessive taxes and unnecessarily high energy bills. Some employed in the fossil fuel industry pay with loss of livelihoods. The price for the poorest among us — particularly in the developing world — may be lives lost through further impoverishment and early death.

Some climate warmists may be ignorant of science’s corruption. However, others cynically take advantage of it for money and power. At some point, this facade will collapse because of the lack of reality behind it. Nonetheless, we are obligated to do what we can to accelerate the falsehood’s dismantlement if only to honor sacrifices made by others in the name of truth.

In the 16th century, Martin Luther freed millions from the tyranny of a corrupt church by refusing to recant what he knew to be true. He managed to avoid torture and death by fire for his alleged heresies. Others were not so fortunate.

Yet our obligation is deeper than memorializing the past. As biographer Eric Metaxas writes: “In the end, what Luther did was not merely to open a door in which people were free to rebel against their leaders but to open a door in which people were obliged by God to take responsibility for themselves.”

Those who recognize the wrong can do no other than to point it out. And so we do.