Canadian climatologist Dr Tim Ball writes: "I will not apologize for my outrage at being lectured to about my moral obligations concerning climate change from the likes of Benjamin Santer, from his position at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. Ironically, and sadly, he is right that we need to address climate change, but for the wrong reason. We need to address the false science about climate change and global warming he was part of creating and perpetuating almost from the start. We need to address and stop the use of science for a political agenda, as his latest pontificating illustrates."
This detailed report prepared by Dr Ole Humlum for the Global Warming Policy Foundation covers all the aspects of "climate change" and shows we have little or nothing to worry about - unless it is future cooling. Dr Humlum is former Professor of Physical Geography at the University Centre in Svalbard, Norway, and Emeritus Professor of Physical Geography, University of Oslo, Norway.
"There is NO climate emergency. Preaching doom and gloom is a crime against the young generation. These are the key points of a new manifesto from the Climate Intelligence Group or CLINTEL. CLINTEL is a rapidly growing international group, led by prominent scientists, that opposes the ill-founded attempts to scare people into hasty climate policy actions. They also oppose the terrorizing of children as part of the false climate alarm". U.S.analyst Dr David Wojick posts on New Zealand blog, TheBFD.
A post that goes so far, but not far enough, but is informative nevertheless: "The results are meagre from thirty years of debate about a public policy response to climate change. There is little support in America for action, the IPCC’s AR5 has disappeared from the news, much of the public no longer trust climate scientists, and debate has almost stopped. The weather will determine future policy, not our foresight."
In this important paper, German scientist Uili Kulke, quotes Henrik Svensmark, head of solar research at Denmark’s Technical University in Copenhagen: “The climate is influenced more by changes in cosmic radiation than by carbon dioxide”. CO2 has an effect, of course, “but it is far less than most current climate models assume, and also less than the influence of cosmic radiation”. In his opinion, a doubling of the greenhouse gas in the atmosphere would cause an increase in global temperature of at most one degree, and not two degrees, as is now generally accepted.
Our planet has just experienced the most extreme two-year cooling event in a century. But where have you seen this reported anywhere in the mainstream media? You haven’t, even though the figures are pretty spectacular. As James Delingpole reports.
Two Greek scientists report in the Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestial Physics: "The global warming during 1978–2018 was not more enhanced at high latitudes near the surface; the intrinsic properties of the lower stratospheric temperature are not related to those in the troposphere; the results obtained do not reveal the global warming occurrence." Heavy scientific reading, but highly convincing.
"There is nothing coincidental about common déjà vu features of a CO2 climate crisis-premised war on fossil fuels and a hysterically-hyped sulfur dioxide (SO2) emission acid rain environmental calamity a half-century ago.Both scams have claimed to be based upon dire computer model-based predictions calling for costly interventions. Both also involved the same sorts of crony constituencies: alarmist 'scientific authorities,' deep-pocket NGO promoters, and headline-hungry politicians eagerly rewarded by swarms of credulous media reporters." Professor Larry Bell, posts at Newsmax.
As the stretch of years with no statistically significant global warming lengthens, environmentalists scratch their heads and ask, 'Well, if we can’t scare people with global warming, what can we use?' And one of their stock answers has become, 'Ocean acidification!' At Cornwall Alliance, Dr E. Calvin Beisner explains why this is bunkum scientifically.
Dr Roger Higgs (DPhil Oxford, geology, 1982-86) writes: "The United Nations IPCC says ongoing warming is due to man's CO2 emissions, hence 'Anthropogenic Global Warming' (AGW). The 3 pillars on which they base this claim are unscientific and quickly disproved."
Dr Jay Lehr and Tom Harris post at Americaoutloud.com why the rewriting of Earth's climate history is "the most pervasive and damaging example of scientific fraud in the history of mankind".
In an Open Letter to the senior executives of NIWA, MBIE, Ministry for the Environment, Climate Change Commission, the NZTA, and all university vice-chancellors, Peter J Morgan, Honorary Chairman and CEO of Environomics (NZ) Trust, has written what he describes as "Irrevocable refutation of the UNIPCC’s ‘Climate Change’ hypothesis, that mankind’s increasing emissions of CO2 cause the atmosphere to warm up dangerously – known as Dangerous Anthropogenic Global Warming (DAGW)".
In the light of a new report by a science group, the Argonauts, showing that the UN IPCC made a fundamental error of physics which predicted warming at three times the rate actually recorded, a New Zealabd trust, Environomics (NZ) Trust, has called on its government to either refute the Argonauts' f...
To emphasise its claim that there is no convincing evidence using the acknowledged scientific method that carbon dioxide (CO2) can or does cause temperature warming beyond natural cyclical limits long observed and recorded, the New Zealand Climate Science Coalition has offered to New Zealanders the Professor Augie Auer prize of $NZ10,000, to be granted to the first applicant to present real-world evidence showing that the man-made fraction of airborne carbon dioxide causes dangerous global warming.
Australian climate analyst John McLean [posts at American Thinker: "When governments' policies are based on science, then it's up to the governments to first determine if the science is solid. It would simply be irresponsible of any government not to do so.Testing the evidence requires an open, impartial, and objective evaluation.
"Large but previously unrecognized uncertainties must therefore exist in all the past and present air temperature projections and hindcasts of even advanced climate models. The unavoidable conclusion is that an anthropogenic air temperature signal cannot have been, nor presently can be, evidenced in climate observables." Patrick Frank posts at Frontiers in Science.
Jill Stirling, of the Friends of Science Society in Canada reads and discusses a letter from Dr Ross McKitrick to a Canadian MP vilified by climate alarmists, in which Dr McKitrick presents convincing rebuttals of the alarmists'claims.
As the world contemplates greater use of wind and solar power, two new papers from USA, find it would require five to 20 times more land than previously thought, and would warm average surface temperatures over the continental U.S. by 0.24 degrees C.
Melanie Phillips, renowned columnist of "The Times" UK, posts at Global Warming Policy Foundation: "The 'climate emergency', which we are told threatens the imminent collapse of civilisation and the extinction of humanity, is a dogma being enforced by a culturally totalitarian tyranny. Threatening the living standards of millions, permitting no challenge and wrecking the livelihoods and reputations of any who dares dissent, it has been created by a repudiation of science, humanity and reason: the very markers of modernity and the west. This is the real emergency."