We re-post this important paper by Drs Jock Allison (New Zealand) and Tom Sheahen (USA) to facilitate its discovery by our website search engine, in view of the extraordinarily wide demand for access to a paper that corrects outrageous over-exaggeration about the effects of agricultural emissions of trace gases such as carbon dioxide and methane.
Professor Judith Curry, former head of the climatology department at Georgia Institute of Technology, gives the example of claims linking recent wildfires in the US to climate change. These are counterproductive, she says, because they deflect attention from the real causes of the problem, particularly management policies for state- and federal-owned forests. According to Professor Curry, these have been far more vulnerable to fires than privately-owned lands. Similarly, hurricane activity is frequently linked to global warming. However, with little evidence of any worsening trend and with large natural variability, Professor Curry says there are no sound climate-change-based arguments for effective policy responses.
The CO2 Coalition in America has issued a memo to the media correcting the record on how they cover stories related to climate science in an increasingly polarized news cycle. The memo is written by Dr. Caleb Rossiter, a climate statistician and the Executive Director of the CO2 Coalition, a group of climate scientists and energy economists that includes two former Trump administration officials, White House science adviser Will Happer and former EPA deputy Mandy Gunasekara.
Professor Larry Bell posts at 'Newsmax': "As one researcher prudently observed, 'It is inconceivable that policymakers will be willing to make billion-and trillion-dollar decisions for adaptation to the projected regional climate change based on models that do not even describe and simulate the processes that are the building blocks of climate variability.'"
Courtesy of New Zealand's most widely-read blog, The BFD, this post by US CFact analyst, Peter Murphy says: "Some of the wealthiest people on the planet are driving and funding the climate change political agenda for more electric cars, wind turbines and solar panels, and eradication of nuclear energy and fossil fuels. Their message is clear: America and the world must reduce their reliance on traditional energy sources and adapt in order to save the planet. That means higher costs, less energy consumption and reduced living standards."
Dr Ed Berry, a US physicist, after several months, has resumed his weekly emails. In this one he invites fellow skeptics to join the climate revolution.
U.S. analyst David Wojick writes: "Many skeptics have written about the Australian bush fires, but science writer and blogger Jo Nova has done something truly remarkable. She has done a running in-depth analysis of both fires and the absurd climate claims made by the alarmists. With 15 fact filled blog posts to date and more coming, hers is a real time documentary of how the alarmists turn natural tragedy into breathless absurdity. I have seen nothing approaching it in terms of the depth of analysis."
WHAT LEGENDARY POETS WROTE ABOUT AUSSIE BUSHFIRES (Did legendary Australian poet Henry Lawson call his country's bushfires climate change? He most certainly did not. It’s nothing more than Mother Nature at her fiery worst. Tragic as it may well be, it’s happened before & it will happen again. It’s just a question of how they live with and manage the Australian bush. Fail to ‘back burn’ during the cooler, less windy months, the fuel load will surely grow & sooner or later, due to either man or lightning strike, it will surely burn, often with dire consequences for those who choose to build & live nearby.
Toward the end oi a longer poem in 1886, Banjo Paterson wrote about bushfires:
Coalition member Bryan Leyland adds his comment about historical origins of Australian bushfires:
And Christie, a contributor to the New Zealand blog "TheBFD" adds pertinent comments:
In Australia, Graham Williamson has rebutted in convincing detail claims of a university professor that the bushfires are caused by "climate change":
In America, Dr Roy Spencer, of the University of Alabama, pioneer of accurate satellite global temperaure observation and recording has rebutted claims by the Australian Bureau of Meteorology that 2019 is the country's warmest year on record:
Blog: Aussie firefighters say "Don't blame climate change":
UP-DATED 10 JANUARY: Jo Nova reminds us that "Black Friday in 1939 was an Australian bushfire disaster:
Dr Roger Higgs, Geoclastica Ltd, posts at Electroverse: "We urgently need to expose the ‘CO2 = pollutant’ fallacy being forced upon your children, grandchildren, nephews and nieces by schools, universities, governments and mainstream media worldwide, and to denounce it in scrupulously truthful terms easily understood by the public, including those youngsters themselves. Here are 25 simple bullet points:
The Global Climate Intelligence Group (CLINTEL) is an EU-based organization promoting climate realism in the face of climate alarmism. CLINTEL authored “There is No Climate Emergency,” prepared by 700 scientists and professionals, When this CLINTEL document was attacked by the Poynter Institute on the basis of its membership, not the content of the document, Poynter was condemned in an open letter by CLINTEL president Dr Guus Berkhout who gave a welcome lesson in how such debates should be conducted.
Chris Mitchell writes in 'The Australian': " Environment writers should accurately report what climate scientists say. But they should also report what economists and scientists in disciplines such as physics, astronomy and geology say. Climate science is a relatively new field and many in it know their computer modelling is far from perfect. The sun and the Earth’s core are the main sources of heat on our planet, so media sneering at reporting of the work of astronomers and geologists on climate is infantile."
This not a joke. Anthony Watts reports on his blog WUWT: "According to her mother Malena Ernman (48), 16-year-old Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg can see CO2 with the naked eye. She writes that in the book ‘Scenes from the heart. Our life for the climate’, which she wrote with her family."
From Dr Ed Berry in U.S.: "New calculations prove all human CO2 emitted since 1750 has added only 31 ppm (parts per million) of CO2 to the atmosphere, and natural CO2 has added 100 ppm. All human carbon has added only one percent to the carbon in Earth’s carbon cycle. Nature has added much more carbon to the carbon cycle than humans have added. The new calculations use data from the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)."
Eminent professor of geology, Ian Plimer, writes in 'The Austraian" newspaper: As soon as the words carbon footprint, emissions, pollution, and decarbonisation, climate emergency, extreme weather, unprecedented and extinction are used, I know I am being conned by ignorant activists, populist scaremongering, vote-chasing politicians and rent seekers. Pollution by plastics, sulphur and nitrogen gases, particulates and chemicals occurs in developing countries. That’s real pollution. The major pollution in advanced economies is the polluting of minds about the role of carbon dioxide. There are no carbon emissions. If there were, we could not see because most carbon is black. Such terms are deliberately misleading, as are many claims."
Robert Lyman writes for Friends of Science Calgary: "There are four ways in which actual global trends are diverging more and more from the predictions upon which climate activists base their claims of impending catastrophe and allegedly 'inevitable decarbonization' of the world economy. After almost thirty years of measurement, the gentle rise in average global temperatures is near the bottom of the range projected by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). If, as many now expect, the world enters a cooling trend over the next few decades, average temperatures will fall entirely outside that range, and demonstrate conclusively that the IPCC models do not provide a reliable foundation for climate policy."
Professor Bruce Pardy writes in the 'Financial Post': "Paris is a climate fairy tale. It has always been more about money and politics than the environment. Last year, U.S. President Donald Trump wisely announced that America would withdraw. For developed nations who still believe Paris is a viable plan, the prospect of a massive transfer of wealth under the guise of carbon reductions must seem less attractive without the U.S. to help foot the bill."
This edited transcript on EIIR of an interview with Professor Larry Bell about Rupert Darwall's book, "Green Tyranny" is chock full of facts and figures that rebut alarmist claims about 'climate'change' and "renewable' energy.
On April 1, 2019, the American Journal of Climate Change rejected a paper by physicist Dr Ed Berry for the following reason: "The conclusion of this paper is completely opposite to the consensus of the academic community." Dr Berry comments: "Yes, it is. But the journal did not forward any evidence that there is an error in my paper and did not acknowledge that my paper proves the 'consensus' is wrong. So, if it is unacceptable to publish a paper that contradicts the 'consensus' how can there be progress in science?" Read the paper here, and judge for yourself:
U.S. meteorologist Chuck Wiese has immediately supported the accuracy of Dr Berry's paper: Download ChuckWiese.pdf
A new paper published by researchers form the University of Turku in Finland suggests that even though observed changes in the climate are real, the effects of human activity on these changes are insignificant. The team suggests that the idea of man-made climate change is a mere miscalculation or skewing the formulas by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).