Friday, 24 February 2017

SCOTT PRUITT TO HEAD THE EPA IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION

This piece explains the policy to be followed by the newly appointed head of the American Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). He is going to take the EPA back to its core responsibility and away from its recent course of climate change activism. 

Thursday, 23 February 2017

EXCELLENT LECTURE BY PROF.JOHN CHRISTY

Here is a very important lecture by one of the most credible scientists you can hear, Professor John Christy. He has a way of putting the science across that makes it easily understandable to all. He makes many excellent points but one that stands out for me is the immeasurable difference that would be made by massive unilateral cuts in CO2 emissions by the USA. This can be accessed from about 24 minutes into the video. This video has had 11,800 viewings to date but it needs to be seen by a much larger audience so please view it and, if you agree then pass it on to others.  

Wednesday, 22 February 2017

SAME SEX MARRIAGE THE MODEL FOR CLIMATE ACTION

This piece looks at a climate alarmists plan to convince us to give up fossil fuels by  learning lessons from the same sex marriage movement. This is a desperate ploy from people who are running out of ideas. He claims that gay marriage was adopted by popular demand, although it was in fact imposed by government. Perhaps he hopes that renewables will replace fossil fuels in the same way. What he overlooks is that without fossil fuels we would have expensive unreliable electricity and that would not be popular and could not be imposed in a democracy. 

Monday, 20 February 2017

CALIFORNIA'S DAM LEAK CAUSES ENERGY CRISIS

This article looks at the ramifications of the damaged dam in California. After years of low rainfall they are now experiencing how the weather can change, just as happened in Brisbane, Australia. What this shows us is not that humans are damaging the climate - it is simply that weather changes and we humans had better be prepared for it, because we cannot predict it. 

Sunday, 19 February 2017

SURVEY GETS THE "RIGHT ANSWERS" ON GW

This Survey shows that if you ask the "right" questions you can get the answers you want. What this survey does not show (as the questions were not asked) is:

What percentage of people were prepared to pay considerably more for their energy in order to reduce the world's CO2 emissions by a very small and insignificant amount?

What percentage of people were aware that the statistics used to provide evidence to support climate alarm were being manipulated by some leading climate scientists?

What percentage of people were aware that global warming has been much lower in the past twenty years than in the previous twenty, even though emissions of CO2 have continued to increase significantly?

Of course no climate alarmist organisation is going to ask these type of questions because they don't even want to admit these things are true.

Saturday, 18 February 2017

BEWARE THE TROJAN HORSE OF SUSTAINABILITY

This article looks at the UN "sustainability agenda" and explains how an innocuous sounding agenda in fact hides a wealth of freedom and job destroying regulations. A kind of Trojan horse for the modern age.
"Who today can foresee what technologies future generations will have 25, 50,or 200 years from now? What raw materials they will need? How are we supposed to ensure that those families meet their needs"?
"Why then would we even think of empowering government to regulate today’s activities today based on the wholly unpredictable technologies, lifestyles, needs, and resource demands of distant generations? Why would we ignore or compromise the needs of current generations, to meet those totally unpredictable future needs – including the needs of today’s most impoverished, energy-deprived, malnourished people, who desperately want to improve their lives"?

Friday, 17 February 2017

THIS IS WHY TRUMP QUIT THE TPP

Many people must be wondering why USA President, Donald Trump issued an Executive Order to leave the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). On the surface the TPP seems like a beneficial free trade agreement, but dig deeper and you find that it is like another version of the EU, packed with regulations and environmental dictats including those on climate change. Read this article for more details. It would have tied the USA into carrying out things that were against the benefit of its own citizens. Thank goodness they elected Donald just in time. 

Thursday, 16 February 2017

ANOTHER RESPECTED SCIENTIST COMES OUT AGAINST CO2 GW HYPOTHESIS

This article is by a respected scientist and meteorologist and life-long Democrat who has studied the global warming hypothesis and came to the conclusion that it wasn't correct. He is one of a growing number of eminent scientists to speak out against the increasingly dodgy-looking CO2 warming hypothesis.

Wednesday, 15 February 2017

WHY SHOULD WE TRUST CLIMATE SCIENTISTS? ASKS DAVID ROSE

David Rose's latest article in the Mail on Sunday looks at the response to his three page article of the week before on the way global warming data was misused to exaggerate the warming trend and create alarm where none was justified.

Tuesday, 14 February 2017

CARLISLE FLOODING DOWN TO LACK OF MAINTENANCE (NOT CLIMATE CHANGE)

This report gives a full account of the flooding in Carlisle of a year ago, which some climate alarmists attributed to "global warming". The following paragraph is very telling.

"Contrary to Government reporting on "Desmond" (the named storm that caused the flooding) the flooding of Carlisle was not principally caused by "climate change" but as a direct result of long term lack of river maintenance and poor management causing the build up of accumulated gravels and thereby forcing rivers to run higher in their channels than they used to".

Guaranteed that this report will not figure in any mainstream news bulletin.

Monday, 13 February 2017

"SHOW THE LOVE" AND SUPPORT THE AFFORDABLE FUEL COALITION

As climate alarmists desperately try to shore up their core support (as more and more of the general public begin to desert them) an organisation called the Climate Coalition has written a report with a press release entitled "Show The Love"claiming a whole raft of weather damage is actually caused by something called "climate change".

Who are the Climate Coalition? Here is the answer. While many are small local groups of environment worriers, others are huge wealthy multi-national charities. When looking through them all it seems at first sight that they must represent a huge number of people. However even though they collectively comprise a large membership, many of their members may not share the beliefs of their leadership and in reality that is probably the case. It is a pity that there is not an opposing coalition. It could be called the Affordable Fuel Coalition, but even though a lot of individuals might join, I doubt there would be many organisations prepared to publicly sign up. Such is the power of propaganda!

I doubt if any of the leaders of these organisations has ever looked at the evidence to see if the claims they make are in fact supported by the scientific data. Luckily for us someone has done it for us. The result is, as expected, the claims are unsubstantiated and can safely be explained as due to changes in the weather - something that we humans can have no power over, other than to prepare and adapt to it.

Sunday, 12 February 2017

ROLLING BLACKOUTS IN SOUTH AUSTRALIA - IS THIS OUR FUTURE?

This piece gives a warning that a grid relying on increasing amounts of wind energy is very vulnerable to periods of calm conditions. This is likely to lead to the situation described in the link. Could the UK come to this?

More on this here. Further updates here.

Saturday, 11 February 2017

UK ENERGY BILLS HIGHER THAN GOVERNMENT FORECAST

This report explains that the government is to breach its own limit on the amount of subsidies being paid to renewable energy schemes. The costs of green energy schemes are capped as part of a framework, and are funded through levies on energy companies and inevitably paid for by consumers in their energy bills. But the Public Accounts Committee said the Government’s management of the framework lacks “transparency, rigour and accountability”.

Friday, 10 February 2017

COMPUTER MODEL SURFACE TEMPERATURE ADJUSTMENTS NOT RELIABLE

This article shows just how unreliable the adjustments made to surface temperatures are. Remember the whole of the warming since 1880 is only about 1 degree C and so even a small error of 0.1 C is 10% of it. Hence these errors mean the whole record is no longer trustworthy. Alas the public are not being informed about this, unless they read the climate blogs or the Mail on Sunday. When will the TV news people escape from their current global warming obsession and start to update the public?

Thursday, 9 February 2017

POLAND TO TAKE EU TO COURT OVER GLOBAL WARMING RULES

This piece explains what is happening as nations realise the huge economic cost of following the EU climate change policies. The EU is facing a lot of problems including brexit, but the energy policy has not received much coverage in the mainstream media, yet. 

Wednesday, 8 February 2017

MATT RIDLEY - POLITICS AND SCIENCE ARE A TOXIC COMBINATION

This article explains the significance of the latest fakery coming from  the alarmist climate science camp. Funny, but I haven't heard anything about this on the news.

This piece by the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Science, Space, and Technology members responded to reports about the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) 2015 climate change study (“the Karl study”). It looks like trouble ahead for Dr Karl and his careless associates.

Tuesday, 7 February 2017

JAPAN TO BUILD 45 NEW HELE COAL PLANTS

45 High Energy Low Emission (HELE) coal plants are to be built in Japan according to this piece. It is becoming clearer by the day that developed nations are not following the UK's Climate Change Act, and it's about time that here in the UK we had a re-think too.

Monday, 6 February 2017

THE FINAL COUP DE GRACE (FOR EU INDUSTRY)

If only all our politicians were as sound as Roger Helmer MEP. His blog is always worth reading and this piece sums up the situation of EU industry's competitiveness as a result of the carbon taxes imposed by the EU Emission Trading System (ETS). All the EU politicians must know he is speaking the truth and yet most of them will not admit it. They cannot impose extra taxes without making them uncompetitive. It's that simple.

Sunday, 5 February 2017

MAIL ON SUNDAY EXPOSES CLIMATE CHANGE FRAUD

Wow!! A three page expose in today's Mail on Sunday shows how vital data was manipulated at the highest level in order to influence the Paris climate summit. This could be as big as the email exposure of climate scientists back in 2008. I wonder if the big TV channels will put it on their news bulletins?

Saturday, 4 February 2017

IS USA EPA DOOMED?

This article explains the likely scenario for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under the new government in the USA. The linked article gives a very positive outcome (for a sceptic).

Friday, 3 February 2017

BOOKER HIGHLIGHTS RENEWABLE MADNESS IN UK. WILL TRUMP SHOW US THE WAY?

This piece by Christopher Booker in the Sunday Telegraph highlights the huge costs of renewable energy schemes in the UK. We urgently need to end this madness. Perhaps if President Trump can show the way forward Theresa May will follow his lead. We can only wait and hope.

Thursday, 2 February 2017

THE GW FALL BACK PLAN FOR $9 BILLION IF REQUIRED

This article looks at a simple way to lower the earth's temperature that could be deployed at a fraction of the cost of the current efforts to reduce CO2 emissions. We could just leave it in abeyance until (or if!) the need for it arises. Problem solved!

Wednesday, 1 February 2017

SUPPORT TRUMP'S VISIT TO THE UK - SIGN THE NEW PETITION

The link to the petition is in this short article. Those of us who want to see common sense on climate know that Trump is our best chance and so it is important to support him when we can. 

WILLIAM HAPPER Q & A - A REAL TOUR DE FORCE

Here is an in-depth dialogue with Dr William Happer that is well worth reading, even though it is quite lengthy. If you can stand it, there is also a similar one with arch alarmist, Dr David Karoly. Each of them was then supposed to write a rebuttal, though for some reason Karoly seems to have backed out. They are now looking for an alarmist scientist to replace him.

Tuesday, 31 January 2017

SOLAR POWER IN THE UK - AN IMPOSSIBLE DREAM

This study first contributes to the debate by estimating the output of a model UK fleet of solar farms rated at 8.4GW, by using ten years of half-hourly aviation weather reports as a data source.  The key findings for such a solar fleet are that: - It has a capacity factor of just 9% when the panels are new, and so generates less than a tenth of its nominal output over the course of a year. - It produces hardly any power in winter when demand is highest. - Power output is severely intermittent, lying below 10% of installed capacity for 5,790 hours a year and exceeding 60% for only 7. The whole report is quite long and detailed but should not be ignored.

Monday, 30 January 2017

TRUMP STEPS UP A GEAR

This piece describes the massive change that has come over the USA government since the new president took over. It all seems unbelievable to me after what we have been used to. I hope he gets the support he needs to follow through.

Sunday, 29 January 2017

UK GOVERNMENT PAYS MILLIONAIRES TO HEAT SWIMMING POOLS

This story in the Mail draws attention to yet more madness in a pathetic attempt to reach renewable targets. You really could not make this up.

Saturday, 28 January 2017

LIES AND PROPAGANDA

This piece looks at some recent examples which show all too clearly what is going on. When will the media wake up to the lies and start to print some more truthful material?

Friday, 27 January 2017

WHAT ABOUT THE TEMPERATURE TREND?

The mainstream media makes much mention of 2016 being the hottest year ever, but they are very quiet about the temperature trend. This article looks at that point for us. You can guess that the actual rate of increase in world average surface temperature over the past 20 years has been much less than predicted. In fact a paltry 0.06 C per decade, which translates to 0.6 C per century, which is even less than the last century. Why won't the BBC mention it?

Thursday, 26 January 2017

ARCTIC ICE AT SAME LEVEL AS 2007

This article gives the details. It goes on to say that ice levels are considerably up on those of the 1970's. I wonder why we never hear that?

Wednesday, 25 January 2017

TRUMP ADMINISTRATION CLAMPS DOWN ON GRATUITOUS PROPAGANDA BY PUBLIC SERVANTS

At last we have someone in power who can call a halt to the never ending flow of climate alarmist propaganda being pushed out by government employees. Here is an example of the new stricter control being put in place and long overdue it is. We may yet see some of the hidden evidence that shows how much uncertainty there is about all this - so much that it would be foolish to spend billion of dollars to reduce CO2 (as the previous president was doing).

TRUMP'S NEW ENERGY POLICY ON PRESIDENT'S WEBSITE

Here is the President's new energy policy which makes sensible reading. It includes "eliminating harmful and unnecessary policies such as the Climate Action Plan" and  "take advantage of the estimated $50 trillion in untapped shale, oil, and natural gas reserves", "reviving America’s coal industry" and "refocus the EPA on its essential mission of protecting our air and water".  How refreshing to see such a common sense policy.

Tuesday, 24 January 2017

UK GOVERNMENT BLOWS £160 MILLION ON CANCELLED CO2 CAPTURE PROJECT

This post looks at the phenomenal waste of money by the UK in trying to get a "carbon" capture power plant going. In the end you cannot buck the market (unless the government is prepared to spend huge amounts of taxpayers money).  We have to spend around 60% more to build every new power station and then throw away 40% the electricity it makes in order to capture the CO2.

Monday, 23 January 2017

TEMPERATURE DATA - SURFACE v SATELLITE, WHICH IS BEST?

There is a lot of argument over this issue. This article looks at the question and declares why the satellite is far superior. And yet some climate scientists try to make out the reverse is true. There is a lot of faith put into the surface data by alarmists which might be because the surface data show a larger warming effect. 

Sunday, 22 January 2017

OBAMA SENDS FINAL CHEQUE TO HIS FAVOURITE CHARITY

USA taxpayers waved goodbye to another $500 Million, sent by the outgoing president to the UN's Green Climate Fund. This piece gives the details. It will be interesting to see how Trump deals with similar requests in the future.

Saturday, 21 January 2017

PROF TIM BALL MEETS TEAM TRUMP

This piece comes from an interesting website called "The Rebel Media" and there looks to be some interesting stuff on it. Meanwhile climate alarmists are hopeful that Trump can be persuaded to change his views according to the BBC. 

Friday, 20 January 2017

STEPS TRUMP SHOULD TAKE TO END INTERNATIONAL ENERGY POVERTY

Trump And International Energy Poverty: Five Steps
Watts Up With That, 17 January 2017
 By Caleb Stewart Rossiter, School of International Service and Department of Mathematics and Statistics, American University.

 
Primum non nocere — above all, do no harm, says the medical maxim. In public policy, where every action has different effects on different people, the maxim becomes “above all, do no net harm.” That means that the benefits of a policy should outweigh its costs. For example, it’s all well and good for the government to start a jobs program, but we also have to estimate how many other jobs would never exist because raising taxes to pay for the program reduces private investment and consumption. What, we properly ask, will be the net effect of the program on employment?

Consider the Obama administration’s efforts to avoid fossil-fueled climate catastrophes. While well-intentioned, these efforts to reduce industrial emissions of carbon dioxide and other “greenhouse” gasses did a lot of net harm to the people of the formerly colonized countries in Africa, Asia, and Latin America.

Indeed, Obama’s policies were reminiscent of colonialism’s attempt to make these regions producers of raw materials rather than industrial competitors. Obama’s climate alarmists discouraged poor countries from building power plants and modern transmission grids, and instead offered foreign aid to help them stay “off the grid” with small-scale wind and solar projects. The administration also drove up the price of food in poor countries by diverting crops to meet “green” fuels quotas, and stood by while the European Union punished these countries for exporting “carbon-intensive” products. The moral issue here is that the costs of the predicted climate catastrophes are hypothetical, meager, and in the distant future, while the health and economic benefits of fossil-fueled growth for poor countries are real, massive, and available right now.

In terms of health, people need reliable power in their homes, factories, and offices. If they cannot get it from electricity they will get it by burning wood, dung, and charcoal and firing up their personal diesel generators. In Africa, where only 25 percent of homes have reliable electricity and most factories and office suffer from frequent black-outs, the particulate matter emitted by these inefficient energy sources pose a constant crisis in respiratory disease. In terms of economic growth and the increase in life expectancy that it creates, we can simply note that since embracing fossil-fueled capitalism with a vengeance China has nearly eliminated its 20-year gap with the 80-year life expectancy of developed countries, while Africa lags at 59 years.

Here are five steps President Trump can take to stop us from doing harm, and maybe even start us doing some good, in the developing world’s quest for the better and longer life that reliable electric power can bring.

Generate Power: Instruct U.S. representatives at the World Bank and the regional development banks, as well as officials of the Agency for International Development (the State Department’s foreign aid office) to support rather than oppose, as we currently do, loans and grants for power plants that rely on coal, gas, or oil. By helping countries build modern, efficient plants outfitted with “scrubbers” we can dramatically cut emissions of sulfur dioxide and other particulates. Unlike carbon dioxide, which is a beneficial trace gas that increases crop yields as a fertilizer, these are real pollutants, and need to be controlled.

Support the Grid: The Obama administration’s Power Africa campaign is biased in favor of “off-grid” solutions such as small-scale, local wind and solar farms. This is colonialist to the core in a continent that is still “under-developing” by exporting raw materials to its former masters in return for imports of finished goods. Africa needs to have consistent power for factories and offices, or it will never be able to compete in the global economy. The only way to have consistent power is with a modern grid. Period. The grid can develop slowly, so that it can be maintained, but in the long run, as the success of China shows, you can’t get there without it.

Aid only sustainable infrastructure projects: Developing countries, and African ones in particular, are littered with abandoned “White Elephants” – high-technology factories, dams, processing plants, wells, and tractors provided by well-meaning foreign aid donors. They fell into disuse because recipient governments lacked the political will and the economic environment needed to sustain them.

Bringing technology in from a different country that is at a different stage of economic development is tricky in the best of circumstances. It is a waste of money and time if the recipient government is undemocratic, corrupt, or repressive. American diplomats and foreign aid officials need to be rewarded rather than punished, as they inevitably are in the foreign aid game, for properly assessing the likelihood of sustainability and cancelling projects. Most economic development comes when the local conditions permit it. Foreign aid can do little when dictatorship and corruption prevail, as they do in most African countries.

End biofuel requirements: “Biofuel starvation” is what Africans call it when companies from developed countries take over villages’ crop lands so they can make a profit meeting “green” fuel requirements. The Trump administration should drop our own ethanol minimums, and make it a principal point of trade and diplomacy talks with European countries to get them to drop theirs.

Oppose “carbon-content” rules: In their never-ending quest to find phony “carbon off-sets” that allow them to claim reductions in carbon dioxide without closing their own power plants, European countries have made a mess out of the simple act of importing goods from developing countries. Flowers from Kenya, for example, pay a carbon tax because they are transported on airplanes, which use more fossil-fuel per flower than a slower ship. As part of an international consortium on air travel, the United States can object to and reverse such rules, leading to more trade, and jobs, in developing countries. Congress enacted legislation in 2011 that blocked the consortium’s scheme to place a carbon tax on all air travel. As we protect our travel rights we should also look out for those of exporters in developing countries.

Thursday, 19 January 2017

CLIMATE EXTREMISTS GOING FOR BROKE

These are the aims of an organisation called Avaaz according to an email sent out to their supporters:

In the next 2 years, our community has voted to drive forward 3 more game changers -- things we don't need Trump* for:
  • Push 10 major countries and corporations to switch to 100% clean energy.
  • Pass laws in the 5 major car-manufacturing countries requiring all new vehicles to be electric.
  • Eliminate $1 trillion in taxpayer subsidies for big oil and coal, and invest it clean energy.
*Obama couldn't achieve this either.
    I would suggest this is a tiny bit ambitious, going much further than even the UK Climate Change Act. I hear there is a new film out called "La La Land". Maybe this is the sequel!

    Wednesday, 18 January 2017

    THE LAST ICE AGE ARRIVED IN SIX MONTHS ACCORDING TO NEW RESEARCH

    Well actually it's seven years old research, but I only just caught up with it!

    Here is the detail from the Daily Mail article back in November 2009. I thought it was interesting and still relevant. What it implies is that an ice age is still something to be concerned about, despite all the hype and exaggeration about warming. It's the unexpected that is likely to cause us the worst problems despite all the best endeavours of scientists.

    Tuesday, 17 January 2017

    UK FUTURE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY LOOKS INSECURE AND COSTLY

    The two papers below are from the Scientific Alliance. They make worrying reading for citizens, businesses and government. The authors are people with impressive credentials in the field.

    National Grid, in its 2016 study Future Energy Scenarios, considered four alternative views of UK energy supply and demand up to 2040. While these may be useful as a framework within which to plan, they say nothing about one essential factor, security of supply. For each of the scenarios, we estimate the possibility of meeting an established risk baseline: a grid supply failure occurring in no more than four winters every hundred years (as used prior to privatization).
    The security of supply under future energy scenarios

    Despite having installed more than 38GW of renewable energy generating capacity in the last decade, The UK has reached a capacity crisis. There is no hard evidence that this push for renewables has been an effective way to reduce CO2 emissions, and the cost has certainly been very large. The analysis presented in these two papers makes a strong case for a radical review of energy policy from an engineering perspective, placing equal weight on cost, security and environmental impacts. 
    The cost of supply under future energy scenarios

    Monday, 16 January 2017

    WHY TIDAL POWER IS NOT FOR THE UK

    Here is a good and balanced piece on the tidal power debate which is currently going on here fuelled by a new report in favour by an ex MP Charles Hendry.  The final analysis leads to the conclusion that it is too expensive.

    Sunday, 15 January 2017

    CENSORSHIP GROWS IN THE CLIMATE DEBATE

    This piece illustrates what is going on. In the end such action is counter-productive to those who do it as it re-enforces in the public mind that they have things to hide - as they have.

    Saturday, 14 January 2017

    GERMANY'S SELF-INFLICTED DECLINE

    Here is a most interesting article by Fritz Vahrenholt who was one of the founders of the environmental movement in Germany. He holds a PhD in chemistry and is Honorary Professor at the Department of Chemistry at the University of Hamburg. Since 1969 he has been a member of the Social Democratic Party (SPD). From 1976 until 1997 he served in several public positions with environmental agencies such as the Federal Environment Agency, the Hessian Ministry of Environment and as Deputy Environment Minister and Senator of the City of Hamburg. In 2001, he founded the wind energy company REpower and was director of RWE’s renewable energy division Innogy, one of Europe’s largest renewable energy companies. His 2012 book The Neglected Sun sparked a broad public discussion in Germany about the dogmatism in climate science. He is the chairman of the German Wildlife Foundation and a member of the GWPF’s Academic Advisory Council. As you can see he is a man of considerable achievement. When he says Germany is in trouble it is clearly something to take note of.

    Friday, 13 January 2017

    TRUMP'S GOLDEN OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN

    This article takes a look at the opportunity missed by President Obama in going full out to support the USA fracking industry. It goes on to suggest that Obama's missed opportunity is now President Trump's chance to take and make America great again.

    Thursday, 12 January 2017

    FULL PAGE ARTICLE IN DAILY MAIL ON HOW CLIMATE SCAMS ARE COSTING THE EARTH

    Only the Irish, you might think, could come up with a scheme where the more energy you used the more money you made. Yet this is only one of the many stupid schemes that politicians have planned to "save the planet".
    Here is the article by James Delingpole who has encapsulated many of the scams and rip-offs in an excellent summary which will be read by millions. Thanks to writers like Delingpole (and Booker and David Rose) the public are becoming increasingly aware of the growing costs of policies that are also failing in their primary objective of "saving the climate".  

    Wednesday, 11 January 2017

    FRIENDS OF THE EARTH PROMISE TO STOP LYING

    This piece explains the background to this, which was a leaflet they have been putting out stating the negatives of fracking. Unfortunately for them they were reported to the ASA (advertising standards authority) and they were unable to substantiate their highly contentious claims. From what is said in the article it does not look like they are likely to keep their promise. 

    Tuesday, 10 January 2017

    YELLOWSTONE PARK, WHERE GW IS ALLEGEDLY CAUSING PROBLEMS

    I have been watching a new series on the wildlife of Yellowstone Park with presenter Kate Humble. It was not long before I discovered that she was pushing the effects of global warming as having bad effects on the flora and fauna. You can watch an episode here. The global warming narrative is slipped in as though it is taken for granted, with no ifs or buts. I have no doubt that this is part of a concerted effort by the leadership at the BBC to persuade the public that this is the case, with the unspoken caveat that we are all responsible. There is an excellent debunk of the proposition here by our good friend Paul Homewood. I don't know if Kate Humble has any views other than those expressed in the film, though I doubt it, but even if she had she knows that to express doubts would be likely to end her career, as it did for David Bellamy.

    Monday, 9 January 2017

    WHY IS THE UK GOVERNMENT GOING SO QUIET OVER THE "SOCIAL COST OF CARBON"?

    Could it be because they know that it is actually lower than the cost of their policies to reduce CO2 emissions? That is the conclusion of this report which looks at the sums, including those carried out by the US Environmental Protection Agency.

    If it is true that the costs outweigh the benefits then surely the public should be told?

    Sunday, 8 January 2017

    THERE IS MORE JOY WHEN ONE CLIMATE ALARMIST REPENTS....

    This post looks in detail at the gradual conversion of Judith Curry from being a full supporter of the IPCC to becoming a climate sceptic. This will have much greater traction with the public than someone simply taking up a position on one side or the other and then sticking to it steadfastly. In particular someone as qualified and thoughtful as Professor Curry. Her "journey" is one that many others may have taken and many more will take.

    Saturday, 7 January 2017

    MARK STEYN ON JUDITH CURRY AND THE CRAZY CLIMATE SCIENCE ECHO CHAMBER

    This piece from Mark Steyn's blog pulls no punches as usual. His anecdotes of how Judith was treated when giving testimony to Congress as well as the disgraceful comments of Michael Mann make this an article worth reading. 

    Friday, 6 January 2017

    UK £18 MILLION TIDAL ENERGY SCHEME BREAKS DOWN AFTER 3 MONTHS

    This article explains the details of this modern white elephant that is pushing up our energy costs.

    Thursday, 5 January 2017

    JUDITH CURRY TO RETIRE

    One of the most high-profile sceptical climate scientists, Professor Judith Curry, has announced that she is to retire from academic life. This article gives the details. Her common sense approach has been a breath of fresh air. We need more scientists to speak out in this way, but such is the intimidation that they face that it is understandable that few do.

    Wednesday, 4 January 2017

    ANOTHER UK MP GETS IT ON THE CLIMATE CHANGE ACT

    This post by the UK's only UKIP MP, Douglas Carswell, shows that he understands the damage being caused by the UK's climate change policy, and he is not the only one, though sadly he is still in a minority.

    Tuesday, 3 January 2017

    RUBBISH DUMP POLAR BEARS ARE "CLIMATE REFUGEES"

    This piece makes the claim in the title, which is designed to persuade us that the bears are in trouble when the evidence is that they are doing fine. Just one more small piece of propaganda. 

    Monday, 2 January 2017

    SCEPTICAL CLIMATE SCIENTISTS

    This article explains that in the USA there are now quite a few sceptical climate scientists who are optimistic that they will get an opportunity to research natural climate change as well as so-called man made change. The incoming Trump administration may allow their views to be developed and heard. I certainly hope this will happen.

    Sunday, 1 January 2017

    SCIENTIST SACKED FOR TOO MUCH HONESTY

    Read about it here - Scientist fired for being too open and honest. What a strange and twisted world we live in. Happy New Year!

    Saturday, 31 December 2016

    UK NATIONAL TRUST IN CLIMATE CHANGE MYTH PROPAGANDA EXERCISE

    This article by the indefatigable Paul Homewood looks at a climate review carried out by the National Trust in Britain and he points out how each of the climate impacts they select is either incorrect or cherry-picked. Paul's work is invaluable, as without it we would have no evidence with which to rebut this kind of propaganda.

    NO SCIENTIST SHOULD BELIEVE THAT COMPLICATED MODELS CAN PREDICT THE FUTURE

    This article poses the idea that  no scientist really believes that complicated models with lots of variables can reliably predict the future. It goes on to suggest that no non-scientist can evaluate the claims of climate science because BOTH sides look 100% convincing to the under-informed. In a detailed argument the writer's  assessment is that a bright, well-informed non-scientist has no realistic chance of reaching an independent opinion on climate change that is better than a guess.

    I can see where he is coming from, but what is his definition of a non-scientist? Does he mean someone with no scientific understanding at all, or does he mean someone who is not a climate scientist? I could go further than the writer and say that even an expert climate scientist is guessing when he makes claims about the future because the known science to make such predictions simply does not exist, as the writer himself states at the beginning when he states "no scientist really believes that complicated models with lots of variables can reliably predict the future".

    Of course we make lots of decisions based on guesswork, though to make it sound more respectable we don't use that word, preferring to use "balance of probabilities", or "best estimate", etc. to give an illusion of greater knowledge. In the end if that is all we've got then we have no choice, as decisions have to be made. Even deciding to do nothing is a decision, and often it is the best decision as it is the least expensive.

    Friday, 30 December 2016

    BAH HUMBUG - ALARMIST PURITANS WANT TO BAN YOUR CHRISTMAS LIGHTS

    At last, here is an article telling us that climate alarmists want to ban Christmas lighting. This is a logical view if you really believe that we must do all we can to reduce CO2 emissions, but of course it is not the view shared by most of the public, so I do not expect it will be announced by any serious political party. Perhaps we should put these alarmist politicians on the spot and ask them if they would support such a proposition.

    Thursday, 29 December 2016

    US STATE GOVERNMENTS ISSUE HUGE INCREASE IN FRACKING PERMITS

    Production of natural gas is set to hit new heights as state governments issue a large number of new permits. See here for details. This is bringing new wealth to those areas with gas deposits that are now recoverable. Here in the UK we could be having similar success if only the government would get on with it.

    Wednesday, 28 December 2016

    THE CURRENT ARCTIC "HEATWAVE" IS QUITE COMMON

    This piece explains how Arctic weather can change quite frequently with a wide range of temperatures possible, depending on the jet stream among other factors. So there is no need to panic if there is a warmer spell up there. 

    Tuesday, 27 December 2016

    WHY DO CLIMATE "ACTIVISTS" GET SPECIAL TREATMENT UNDER THE LAW?

    This case is just the latest example of how the courts seem to view those who flout the law for so-called ethical reasons seem to get off very lightly. This only encourages more of the same. I can only assume that the judges and magistrates must sympathise with them. Time to sack them and replace them with others who will uphold the law.

    Monday, 26 December 2016

    JUST LOOK AT WHAT THE ALARMISTS CONSIST OF

    This article looks in depth at how the myriad climate alarmist groups are inter-linked and also how they are funded. When you see the whole lot it looks very impressive, and it is not surprising that some of their messages have got through to the public consciousness. In fact you could be forgiven for thinking that they are unstoppable - except for one thing - the facts are beginning to show that their predictions are way over the top. Donald Trump has come to power not a moment too soon. If his time in office coincides with a downturn in global temperature it will be a perfect storm for the alarmists and give him the perfect reason to turn off the funding taps.

    Sunday, 25 December 2016

    SEASONS GREETINGS TO MY DEAR READERS

    I guess some of you must visit here a number of times through the year and though I don't know most of you, I feel we have an affinity in our mutual interest and scepticism about climate alarm. Do let me know if you have any comments about the blog, likes or dislikes. Next year I will be celebrating the 10th anniversary of this blog and also 500,000 visits, small compared with the major blogs, but still quite a big number.

    Meanwhile enjoy the festive season. 

    OBAMAS LAST MINUTE OFFSHORE DRILLING BAN COULD BE OVERTURNED

    This article explains the reasons why. There is a massive boost for the economy if drilling were to be allowed, so that alone is enough for this to be looked at closely by the Trump administration.  

    Saturday, 24 December 2016

    GREAT CLIMATE CHANGE DEBATE - SCOTT DENNING v ROY SPENCER

    Here is the link to a great debate on the issue of whether climate change is a problem or not. This debate is good because it is conducted with good humour between two leading experts, whose views differ in certain respects, but who agree on the fundamental issues. If you find the scientific details hard to grasp, this debate will mostly be one you can understand, so if you have an hour to spare give it a try.

    Friday, 23 December 2016

    NEVER MIND THE HEATWAVES, IT'S THE COLD THAT KILLS

    This piece gives the details. What is happening as our fuel and power becomes more expensive, is that many people are cutting back on heating and leaving themselves more vulnerable to cold. If the government really cared for us they would give us cheap power, but they are much more fixated on looking good in the CO2 reduction tables, even though in reality all they are doing is exporting the CO2 emissions to China and India.

    Thursday, 22 December 2016

    CLIMATE DATA TAMPERING - HOW IT WAS AND IS BEING DONE

    This article puts the issue into context and shows how it is being done slowly bit by bit. Recent reports indicate that some climate scientists are now concerned that President Trump may try to destroy the data (- that would be the data that has already been altered?)

    Wednesday, 21 December 2016

    UK SHALE GAS GETS APPROVAL FROM HIGH COURT

    This article explains the news that the High Court case brought by climate change activist groups has been rejected and that fracking can go ahead. Maybe we can now look forward to seeing some actual gas extracted sometime in 2017.

    Tuesday, 20 December 2016

    TRUMP OPENS THE DOOR TO USA ENERGY INDEPENDENCE

    Here are the details of how Donald may herald a new golden age for the USA, if he can have the courage to take on the climate alarmists.

    Monday, 19 December 2016

    USA OIL PRODUCERS TAKE ADVANTAGE OF OPEC PRODUCTION CUT

    This piece explains how the gamble by OPEC to cut production does not seem to be working, and in the worst of all worlds (for OPEC) the shale producers have upped their production to supply the shortfall. This, of course, is how free markets are supposed to work. So much for oil running out - no one factored in man's ingenuity. How the climate alarmists must be wringing their hands.

    Sunday, 18 December 2016

    THE SIMPLE WAY TO UNDO OBAMA'S CLIMATE REGULATIONS

    Here's the idea that is allegedly being considered. It sounds like an effective response. Trump's team will have to work smart and avoid long drawn out battles. Softly, softly catchey monkey. 

    Saturday, 17 December 2016

    WILL THE AUSSIES FOLLOW THE EU INTO DECLINE, OR FOLLOW TRUMP?

    This article poses the question and it looks as though the Australian government is split on how to respond to the changed world. The UK is in a similar quandary, though my hunch is that we will see a softening of the policies on CO2 abatement, both in Australia and the UK. 

    Friday, 16 December 2016

    £274MILLION OF TAXPAYERS MONEY GIVEN TO CLIMATE ACTION GROUP AND "LOST"

    Here is the detail. This is what happens when the government is set targets to give away huge amounts of money in overseas aid - inadequate checks and balances are carried out. The Daily Mail are running a big campaign on this and the public are furious to see such waste while those at home are struggling, particularly the care system. Is it any wonder that governments become unpopular?

    Thursday, 15 December 2016

    CLIMATE ALARMISTS PANIC AS THEY AWAIT TRUMP'S ARRIVAL

    I just can't help but smile as I imagine those leading climate alarmists starting to panic as they contemplate the future president's arrival. They have had  it largely their own way for the past eight years or more, but it looks as though it is over for the days of unlimited spending on conferences and so forth. This piece gives a flavour of their fears. I must admit I had great doubts as to whether Donald would be able to overcome all the opposition, but he did, and now he has to make it count for all those who stood by him. What a great Christmas present that would be. A clean environment, cheap plentiful fossil fuels and lower taxes with a more productive economy.

    Wednesday, 14 December 2016

    DONALD TRUMP SET TO MAKE ANOTHER GREAT CHOICE AS SECRETARY OF STATE

    This piece explains how Lex Tillerson, ex CEO of Exxon, was not only working closely with Russia, but also he allowed Exxon to fund climate sceptic groups. At last it seems that true climate scepticism will get a hearing at the top level. Things may be about to take a turn for the better.

    Additional comment - I wonder why our TV news seems to think that working with Russia is such a bad thing? It is not that Rex Tillerson has ever said he approves of Russia's foreign policy. I detect an underlying anti-Trump message coming out here. As with brexit and climate change we get a message with bias here. Important facts are buried.

    Tuesday, 13 December 2016

    CO2 FOUND GUILTY IN US SUPREME COURT DECISION

    This case was decided back in 2007 and yet it appears, so far, not to have led to any significant change.  Here is an article explaining the decision with links to more detail for those of a legal disposition. Readers of this blog will be aware that the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) seems to be very pro-active in recent years to control power station emissions, so it seems strange that it defended this case at all. However it did not appear to do a very good job. I wonder if the new president will do anything to rein in the EPA?

    Monday, 12 December 2016

    HUGE ARTICLE IN MAIL ON SUNDAY HIGHLIGHTS THE RECENT FALL IN GLOBAL TEMPS

    This is the second week that David Rose has published this story. This time he has added it to a new report written by Peter Lilley, MP, and published by the GWPF (Global Warming Policy Foundation). Here  is a link to yesterday's piece. Peter  Lilley's report looks at the cost of the Climate Change Act using the government's own figures, to reveal the massive burden on the economy and on individual energy costs. How long can the government go on with its pretence that this isn't happening?  

    Sunday, 11 December 2016

    WHAT EXACTLY DO 97% OF CLIMATE SCIENTISTS AGREE ON?

    This short video gives an excellent summary of the truth about the 97% of scientists agreeing that climate change is caused by man and is dangerous. It simply isn't true and yet it is constantly being quoted by politicians to end any arguments and justify their massively expensive decarbonisation policies. This short video from Richard Lindzen is also well worth viewing. 

    Saturday, 10 December 2016

    OUR KNOWLEDGE OF THE ARCTIC IS SO LOW WE SIMPLY CANNOT MAKE PREDICTIONS

    This article explains how incomplete our knowledge of the Arctic is, and how climate alarmists have been much too quick to predict and end to summer ice in the Arctic.

    Friday, 9 December 2016

    TRUMP PICKS CLIMATE SCEPTIC TO RUN THE EPA

    Here is the essence of the story and what a great choice he has made. This man has been fighting against the regulations which have been currently coming from the present Environmental Protection Agency leadership. This must surely signal a complete change. More on this here.  And listen to the interview about this here

    LYING ABOUT THE CLIMATE IS NOW THE NORM

    This article puts the case forward, using the example of forest fires in Tennessee being blamed on global warming, despite the evidence not backing this at all. Just one example among so many where the weather is confused with climate and used to bolster a very weak case for man made alarming global warming/climate change. But the public are growing weary of this and we are hoping that Donald Trump will stand firm and bring in a dose of reality. The time is right for it.

    Thursday, 8 December 2016

    UK LABOUR PEER URGES PARTY RE-THINK ON CLIMATE POLICY

    This article by Labour peer, Lord Donoughue, in which he makes a strong case for his party to change its alarmist stance on climate change. I doubt that they will take his sensible advice. The article was published in the magazine for UK politicians "The House". This magazine is distributed to all British MPs and I often get to read it free, as I have it passed to me from my local MP. This is just as well as an annual subscription costs £195. The Lord Donoughue article is in the 2 December edition alongside the pro-alarmist case put by Lord Deben and others. It is good to see the case for climate scepticism put forward yet again.

    Wednesday, 7 December 2016

    FIRST THERE WAS FRACKING, NOW ITS MICROWAVES TO EXTRACT OIL

    Here's the story of this new technology that is about to make oil even more widely available. Any climate alarmists will now be having palpitations at the thought of a whole new raft of fossil fuel coming on stream. So much for peak oil! What a good job that climate alarm has been exaggerated and we can cope with the climate by using technology. 

    Tuesday, 6 December 2016

    NY STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL IN RETREAT OVER ATTEMPT TO SILENCE FREE SPEECH ON GW

    This article explains how Eric Schneiderman, the New York State Attorney General has found his attempt to attack the Competitive Enterprise Institute has back-fired as his case unravelled. Well done to the CEI for defending freedom of speech and standing up to this state official.

    Monday, 5 December 2016

    CLIMATE CHANGE WRITER, DAVID ROSE, TAKES THE FLACK FOR GIVING THE FACTS ON GW

    Poor David Rose, the Mail on Sunday writer who dared to inform us that global land temperatures had fallen by record amounts over the last few months, has been called all sorts of bad names by the climate alarmists. This article gives some details of the row, which highlights how much courage it takes to inform the public about facts to do with our climate (or weather) that don't fit the alarmist narrative.

    Sunday, 4 December 2016

    NEW REPORT FINDS THAT THE CHEAPEST OPTION IS TO ADAPT TO GW, NOT FIGHT IT

    This report gives the evidence to support the proposition that fighting global warming is way more costly than letting it happen and then adapting to it using technology. It's a no-brainer.

    Saturday, 3 December 2016

    SUN GOES QUIET AGAIN AS SCIENTISTS PREDICT MINI ICE AGE COULD BE IMMINENT

    This Mail article gives the details of what is happening to our nearest star. It seems intuitive that it must have a significant effect on our climate. 

    Friday, 2 December 2016

    THE UK SMART METER FIASCO

    Here's the sad tale of the UK government's smart meter fiasco, and a very costly fiasco it is. Once again Paul Homewood has highlighted something which both parliament and the mainstream media seem to have ignored.

    "The government  have just released their long overdue assessment of the cost of the country’s smart metering program.  Hidden among the figures is the amount of money that they have spent.  So far, they have squandered £450 million on the project, despite the fact that not a single compliant smart meter [which conforms to their specifications] has been installed in any house.  By a strange coincidence, that’s exactly the same amount as the shortfall in BHS’ pension fund which occurred when Philip Green flogged off BHS."

    The government  were aiming to install 53 million new gas and electricity meters in British homes by 2020.  Half of these were expected to be installed by 2017, when there would be a project review. The estimated cost of £10.98bn has been underestimated by at least £1.6bn, because they have forgotten to include the cost of smart gas meters. The true cost could amount to at least £14.67bn, which  equates to about £560 per household.

    The design of smart meters in Britain means that if they are hacked, power could be turned off for large chunks of the country, causing massive damage to the grid.  When questioned on the sense of this design in meetings at DECC the reply from utilities is “why would anyone ever do that”. You can read the whole saga at the link at the start of this post.

    Thursday, 1 December 2016

    THE LESSONS OF LYSENKO FOR CLIMATE SCIENCE

    The Lessons of Lysenko
    By Roger Helmer MEP
     
    Image result for lysenkoism
     
    Following the death of Fidel Castro, it's perhaps a good time to think about the malign impacts of totalitarian government, and the damage that political agendas can do to science.
     
    "The term Lysenkoism can also be used metaphorically to describe the manipulation or distortion of the scientific process as a way to reach a predetermined conclusion as dictated by an ideological bias, often related to social or political objectives". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lysenkoism
     
    Dear Reader, you're way ahead of me.  Yes of course, I was struck immediately by the read-across to climate science.  The parallels are remarkable.
     
    You'll be familiar with the story of Lysenko. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trofim_Lysenko  He was a Russian biologist and agronomist who rejected Darwinian evolution and the rôle of genes, and preferred instead the Lamarckian concept of "inheritance of acquired characteristics".  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lamarckism Of course that concept is difficult to accept – especially when you reflect that a man who has lost a leg is perfectly capable of fathering a child with two legs.  With the benefit of hindsight, it is difficult to believe that Lamarckism was once regarded as a credible alternative to Darwinian theory – but so it was.
     
    And Lysenko, in the late 1920s, took that view, and built a whole theory of plant breeding on it.  More than that, he had the ear of Stalin, and Lysenkoism became official Soviet doctrine.  The theory was imposed rigidly.  More than 3000 mainstream biologists were fired, imprisoned or executed for challenging it.  
     
    Lysenkoism held sway in the USSR until the sixties, with dire consequences for Soviet agriculture.  Again with hindsight it is difficult to credit the fact that it survived so long, when it plainly did not work.  But worse than that, not only did it fail in the field (literally), it also totally blocked proper academic study and research in Russia in the area of plant breeding and Mendelian genetics for decades.
     
    So how close are the parallels with climate theory?  Of course Lysenkoism was restricted to the USSR.  And it was imposed by a totalitarian régime that could, and did, shoot dissenters.  Climate alarmism, on the other hand is broadly speaking global (even if some countries merely pay lip-service to the orthodoxy).  It is imposed not by a violent autocracy, but by an intolerant and often vindictive establishment – scientific, media and political.  It threatens not imprisonment and murder, but the destruction of careers.  Scientists who dare to challenge the prevailing view are denied tenure, and publication, and perhaps worst of all grant funding.  As a result, those who do dare to challenge the orthodoxy tend to be older scientists secure in their careers (and their pension funds).
     
    In fact the parallels with the Soviet Union go further.  On the outer fringes of the Warmism movement we see demands for "Nuremberg-style trials" of "climate deniers", http://www.climatedepot.com/2014/02/26/are-you-a-climate-denier-nazi-warmists-declare-nuremberg-style-trials-must-be-held-for-senior-corporate-and-political-executives-responsible-for-crimes-against-humanity-and-planet-that-almost/ and the imprisonment of directors of fossil fuel companies.
     
    Nor is it just scientists and company directors in the firing line.  The BBC, for example (always achingly, painfully "on message") seeks to exclude climate sceptics, and it famously dropped David Bellamy, who was once nearly as popular a presenter on nature and wildlife issues as Attenborough, merely because he dared to express doubts about Global Warming. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2266188/David-Bellamy-The-BBC-froze-I-dont-believe-global-warming.html
     
    We saw with the ClimateGate scandal how leading IPCC scientists engaged in "the manipulation or distortion of the scientific process as a way to reach a predetermined conclusion as dictated by an ideological bias", just as Lysenkoism does.  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/6679082/Climate-change-this-is-the-worst-scientific-scandal-of-our-generation.html
     
    We see that their prescriptions are utterly failing.  Björn Lomborg famously demonstrated (for example) that all the hundreds of millions of dollars invested in solar panels by Germany would have the effect (on the IPCC's own estimates) of delaying the trajectory of global warming by only a few hours -- by 2100.  http://notrickszone.com/2014/03/08/lomborg-congratulates-germany-for-e100-million-climate-change-delayed-37-seconds/#sthash.ebkF2miL.dpbs An utter waste of money and misallocation of resources.
     
    And just as Lysenkoism prevented Russian agriculture from doing the right things, so Warmism, by focusing on mitigation, blinds us to the possible need for adaptation (in the unlikely event that warming becomes a significant problem).
     
    Wealthy economies and societies are far more resilient to adverse conditions.  But prosperity depends critically on the availability of secure and affordable energy – which mitigation and greenery militate against.  Warmism prescribes vast up-front investment to guard against highly speculative and uncertain long-term outcomes.  By the time you realise you're wrong, you've blown billions.  Adaptation on the other hand is proportionate, and involves spending money on targeted projects only as and when (and if) circumstances justify it.
     
    The main difference between Lysenkoism and Warmism, as I see it, is that the damage done by Warmism is on a far larger scale and will be far more difficult to reverse.

    Wednesday, 30 November 2016

    WHY THE UK CLIMATE CHANGE ACT WILL HAVE TO BE REPEALED

    At this moment the current Conservative government is sticking with the Climate Change Act (CCA) which was passed by a previous Labour government, but, as I have said several times on this blog it is simply impossible to see how the later stages of "decarbonisation" of our nation's fuel and energy needs can be carried out without crippling our industry and causing massive pain to the citizens of the UK.

    This is brought out very clearly in a series of blog posts over at NALOPKT (that's Not a Lot of People Know That, to those who didn't guess it). This is the first and the previous two develop the theme further.

    What it says, in summary, is that whilst electricity demand currently peaks at around 50GW, gas demand frequently peaks at over 300GW. If this demand for gas had to be replaced by electricity, as required to meet the demands of the CCA, it would not only need massive increases in generating capacity, it would also necessitate a complete rebuild of the grid and transmission network as the current system would be overwhelmed. All this is still a few years away, so our present lot of politicians can still say they will do it, but the questions they will soon have to answer is - how? and equally important - who is going to pay?

    Tuesday, 29 November 2016

    ROGER HELMER SUMS UP THE CLIMATE CHANGE DEBATE VERY WELL

    Here is his latest post, which I recommend to all. I have known Roger over many years and he has always been consistent and uses measured words in favour of common sense. Sometimes he has caused controversy, but he does not let this prevent him from speaking his mind. If only we had more politicians of his calibre and with his courage.

    Monday, 28 November 2016

    HUGE DROP IN LAND TEMPERATURES CONFIRMS EL NINO CAUSED RECENT HIGHS

    This article in the widely read Mail on Sunday confirms what most people expected - that the recent warming was mainly due to the strong El Nino, not CO2 induced warming. Now that the El Nino is over land temperatures have already fallen by a whole degree Celsius in just a few months.  If Donald Trump wants to show that climate alarm is exaggerated nonsense he may find that this is going to make it even easier for him.

    Sunday, 27 November 2016

    CURRENT POLICIES POSE A SIGNIFICANT THREAT TO ELECTRICITY CONSUMERS

    This piece looks at the recent thinking of the UK regulator and the government on the cost of renewable subsidies to the consumer, which pose a significant cost to consumers, both citizens and business.

    Saturday, 26 November 2016

    COULD THE INTERNET BE CONTROLLED IN AN ORWELLIAN MANNER?

    This piece looks at a possible future where Google decides what is "the truth". Were such a thing to happen I suspect that users would simply avoid Google and use another search engine.

    Friday, 25 November 2016

    DOGGERLAND - PROOF THAT CLIMATE CHANGE HAS ALWAYS BEEN HAPPENING

    Never heard of Doggerland? Blame it on climate change 20,000 years ago. Rising waters have forced populations to relocate since the dawn of early man. Consider that 20,000 years ago, at the end of the last ice age, the North Sea didn't exist. Global sea levels were as much as 400 feet lower than today, Britain was part of continental Europe and Scotland linked by land to Norway. A natural climate shift began to melt the glaciers of Scandinavia. Seismic surveys and ice cores from Greenland suggest that sea level rose as much as 6 feet per century during a series of melting events. Gradually the North Sea formed and then the southern area inundated more land forming islands.

    Those rising oceans created new ports for Greek and Roman naval and trade vessels. But today many of those structures and ruins are inland, out in the open, making them popular tourist destinations. How did that happen? The Little Ice Age once again turned substantial ocean water into ice, lowering sea levels, and leaving former ports stranded. Not enough ice has melted since 1850 to make them harbors again.
    The ancient city of Ephesus was an important port city and commercial hub from the Bronze Age to the Minoan Warm period, and continuing through the Roman Empire. An historic map shows its location right on the sea. But today, in modern-day Turkey, Ephesus is 5 km from the Mediterranean. Some historians erroneously claim “river silting” caused the change, but the real “culprit” was sea level change.
    Ruins of the old Roman port Ostia Antica, are extremely well preserved – with intact frescoes, maps, and plans. Maps from the time show the port located at the mouth of the Tiber River, where it emptied into the Tyrrhenian Sea. The Battle of Ostia in 849, depicted in a painting attributed to Raphael, shows sea level high enough for warships to assemble at the mouth of the Tiber. However, today this modern-day tourist destination is 2 miles up-river from the mouth of the Tiber.

    Just imagine if we were living at that time and we had climate alarmists speaking authoritatively about this warming being caused by mankind emitting CO2?  Think how convincing they would seem as the sea level kept on rising, even though the cause of this was entirely natural we would fall under their spell.   

    Thursday, 24 November 2016

    LET'S CELEBRATE THE BENEFITS OF FOSSIL FUELS

    This article makes the case for fossil fuels and undermines the social cost of carbon being put forward by the climate alarmists. Government agencies claim fossil fuels and carbon dioxide emissions cause “dangerous global warming.” Their latest strategy for advancing this thesis involves estimating the “social cost of carbon” (SCC) – monetized damages associated with alleged climate risks.

    Wednesday, 23 November 2016

    AFTER THE TRUMP WIN, WILL HE FOLLOW THROUGH ON HIS STATED PROMISES?

    This piece looks at the hard road ahead for the new Trump administration in the USA to roll back all the punitive energy and climate change regulations that the Obama people put in. They must suspend and defund any initiatives and orders issued under the Paris climate treaty. And also carry out a truly independent review of the assertions, models, “homogenized” data, science, and research that underpins the whole alarmist agenda, thus exposing the whole charade for what it is.

    But, this article suggests he is softening his stance, which is worrying for those of us who wanted to see a realistic approach. The climate alarmists are very powerful and even Donald Trump is subject to pressure.

    Tuesday, 22 November 2016

    THE ARCTIC ICE SAGA

    Here is an interesting post on what is happening in the Arctic. It is quite a detailed post with lots of visual aids and charts, but quite readable. In fact the blog that it comes from contains a lot of interesting musings about the climate and so I have linked to it via the sidebar. 

    Monday, 21 November 2016

    WILL TRUMP TURN OFF THE FLOW OF MONEY FOR CLIMATE FUNDS?

    This piece looks at the expectation of the third world nations.  There is widespread unease about finance at the Nov. 7-18 talks on climate change among almost 200 nations being held in Marrakesh, Morocco.                   
    "My only worry is the money," said Tosi Mpanu Mpanu of Democratic Republic of Congo, who heads a group of the 48 least developed nations. "It's worrying when you know that Trump is a climate change skeptic," he told Reuters. In fact it is ALL about the money!

    Sunday, 20 November 2016

    MASSIVE NEW OIL AND GAS DEPOSIT FOUND IN TEXAS

    This report explains the find which is worth $900 billion and ensures the USA will have supplies for many decades to come. So much for peak oil! On top of the Trump presidency surely this means the end of any possibility that the USA will reduce its use of fossil fuels. It will be a terrific boost to the economy and jobs. The best possible start for the Trump government.

    Saturday, 19 November 2016

    NO TROPICAL HOTSPOT MEANS CO2 CAUSED WARMING IS HIGHLY EXAGGERATED

    This paper gives a clear look into the evidence for CO2 caused global warming. It finds no evidence of any tropical hotspot, which is the one clear signal that the planet is warming due to CO2 emissions. This result means that there is no risk from increasing levels of CO2 up to the present, hence any effect from it is likely to be small.  

    Friday, 18 November 2016

    A LETTER TO ALL SCIENTIFIC SOCIETIES THAT PERPETUATE GLOBAL CLIMATE ALARM

    This article refers to a letter written to the various "scientific societies" in the USA in response to their  Consensus Scientific View of Climate Change letter to the USA Congress. Below is the letter, which ought to be adapted and sent to all scientific institutions that subscribe to and perpetuate global climate alarm. The Research Report referred to as a link in the letter requires a good knowledge of statistics, but it the statistical arguments it makes which lead to its clear conclusion that the link between CO2 levels in the atmosphere and any rapid rise in global average temperatures is not proven.

    Dear---------,

    This letter is written with respect to the June 28 Letter, subscribed by your organization and some thirty other U.S.-based scientific societies.  I attach a copy of that June 28 Letter for your reference.  Besides this letter to you, we are addressing letters similar to this one to each of those other societies.
    On September 21, 2016 a major new Research Report was published on the ICECAP website and at other locations.  The Research Report was undertaken by its authors because they were unable to find anywhere in the literature of climate change a mathematically rigorous validation of a statistically significant, quantitative relationship between rising atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations and surface as well as tropospheric temperatures.
    The Research Report provides the methodology and findings of a definitive study designed to validate or invalidate the principal scientific hypotheses underlying the EPA’s December 2009 Endangerment Finding with respect to so-called “greenhouse gases,” including the hypothesis that rising greenhouse gas concentrations are likely to be associated with harmful or dangerous increases in surface temperatures.  The results of the Research Report apply equally well to the Physical Science reports issued by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change over the last few decades.  In accordance with the scientific method, the Research Report used the best available temperature data from multiple sources, each of them structurally independent from the others, for the validation/invalidation exercise.  The data used in the Research Report are fully available via links in the Report itself, and came from sources including satellites, weather balloons, ocean buoys, and also surface thermometer records.
    hotspot
    The principal conclusions of the Research Report are as follows:
    * “These analysis results would appear to leave very, very little doubt but that EPA’s claim of a Tropical Hot Spot (THS), caused by rising atmospheric CO2 levels, simply does not exist in the real world.”
    * “Once EPA’s THS assumption is invalidated, then EPA’s climate models that rely upon the THS assumption are also invalid.
    * “[T]his analysis failed to find that the steadily rising Atmospheric CO2 Concentrations have had a statistically significant impact on any of the 13 critically important temperature time series data analyzed.”
    * “[T]hese results clearly demonstrate – 13 times in fact – that once just the ENSO [El Nino/La Nina] impacts on temperature data are accounted for, there is no “record setting” warming to be concerned about. In fact, there is no ENSO-Adjusted Warming at all.”
    The June 28 Letter to which you subscribed contains statements strongly implying that there had previously been some sort of empirical validation of a quantitative causal relationship between increasing atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations and increasing global average surface temperatures.  For example, you state:  “Observations throughout the world make it clear that climate change is occurring, and rigorous scientific research concludes that the greenhouse gases emitted by human activities are the primary driver.” Later in the June 28 Letter, you state:  “There is strong evidence that ongoing climate change is having broad negative impacts on society, including the global economy, natural resources, and human health.”
    However, as noted above, the authors of the Research Report have been unable to find in any scientific study a rigorous empirical validation of a statistically significant quantitative relationship between rising greenhouse gas concentrations and tropical, contiguous U.S. or global temperatures.  Indeed we can find no paper that actually provides mathematically rigorous empirical proof that the effect of increasing atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations on world temperatures is different from zero with statistical significance.
    As you might realize, we are concerned that prestigious scientific societies, including your own, have subscribed to a letter to Members of Congress purporting to convey scientific propositions as having been definitively established, when in fact there has never been a mathematically rigorous empirical validation of the propositions stated, and indeed there now appears to be a definitive scientific invalidation of those propositions.
    Obviously, the June 28 Letter preceded the September 21 Research Report.  We therefore ask you to reconsider your June 28 Letter in light of the Research Report.  Alternatively, could you kindly:
    * Refer us to the research study or studies that, in a mathematically proper and rigorous fashion, empirically validate a quantitative relationship between rising atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations and global temperatures as reflected in all thirteen major data sets as used in the Research Report.  Such a study must be very clear as to the analysis process and data utilized and must be able to be replicated.
    * Refer us to the research study or studies that definitively empirically validate the so-called Tropical Hot Spot that is a critical underpinning of the “lines of evidence” on which EPA says it relies for its Endangerment Finding.  (The term “Tropical Hot Spot” refers to the hypothesized warming pattern whereby increasing greenhouse gas concentrations cause the tropical mid-troposphere to warm more rapidly than the lower troposphere, which in turn warms more rapidly than the surface.)
    * Refer us to the research study or studies that definitively empirically demonstrates that there is statistically significant warming to account for in the global troposphere after controlling for ENSO [El Nino/La Nina] effects.
    In closing, we wish to remind you of the well-known quote from noted physicist Richard Feynman:
    “It doesn’t matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn’t matter how smart you are.  If it doesn’t agree with experiment, it’s wrong.”
    As a leader of a major scientific society, you of course realize that Feynman’s aphorism captures the essence of the scientific method that underlies the entire project of science, including all of the work of your organization and its members.  If you as a scientific society are going to use your authority to advocate for a government policy agenda, the American people are entitled to know the specific empirical work that validates your scientific hypothesis that greenhouse gases are warming the planet. Also, if there is apparently definitive empirical research, such as the Research Report, that would seem to invalidate the principal hypotheses that underlie your policy advocacy, the American people are entitled to your definitive refutation of that work before you continue your policy advocacy.
    In short, if you have mathematically rigorous empirical validation of the hypotheses that underlie your advocacy, kindly provide it.  If you do not, kindly say so.
    Very truly yours,
    Francis Menton
    Law Office of Francis Menton
    85 Broad Street, 18th Floor
    New York, New York 10004
    fmenton@manhattancontrarian.com
    Alan Carlin
    Webmaster: carlineconomics.co
    carlineconomics@gmail.com

    Thursday, 17 November 2016

    DANSGAARD-OESCHGER EVENTS, ANOTHER WELL KEPT CLIMATE SCIENCE SECRET

    Dansgaard-Oeschger Events: Writing in No Tricks Zone, Kenneth Richard discusses papers on Dansgaard-Oeschger cycles, or D-O cycles, which indicate that: “Unlike the relatively stable climate Earth has experienced over the last 10,000 years, Earth’s climate system underwent a series of abrupt oscillations and reorganizations during the last ice age between 18,000 and 80,000 years ago (Dansgaard 1984, Bond et al. 1997, 1999). …There are twenty-five of these distinct warming-cooling oscillations. These include up to 10°C (in the Greenland region) were reached within as little as 50 years or about 2°C per decade.”

    One can assert that D-O events apply only to the Arctic, or to Greenland, specifically. However, alarmists claim that a warming of the Arctic and of Greenland are the result of CO2 caused warming. The alarmists have generally failed to discuss D-O Events and to separate this natural variability from the influence of CO2.