This article comes from a great blog which is new to me. It looks at the Orwellian double-speak coming from many climate alarmists who are desparate to come up with a convincing answer as to why we are experiencing such cold weather, contrary to earlier predictions of the alarmists. Will the Orwellian efforts be successful?
Thursday, 30 December 2010
Wednesday, 29 December 2010
Tuesday, 28 December 2010
Monday, 27 December 2010
Sunday, 26 December 2010
Saturday, 25 December 2010
It's not as if we are coping today, but this report warns of new problems due, of course, to predictions of dramatic climate change. What the public may ask is - if they were unable to forecast the recent severe weather, then why should we believe they can forecasts anything else?
Friday, 24 December 2010
This article in the Financial Post of Canada again highlights the folly of attempting long range weather forecasting. The problem fo alarmists is that the whole theory relies on computer forecasts. If they cannot do even relatively short "long term" forecasts, then why would anyone believe their longer term ones?
Thursday, 23 December 2010
I find it rather hilarious to hear the alarmists telling us that we must not point to any individual weather to dismiss their warnings of damaging climate change. The hilarity comes because it is the alarmists themselves who have confidently predicted that we would see much less of certain types of weather and much more of others. This is brought out very well in this piece. It is very satisfying to see smug people squirming.
Wednesday, 22 December 2010
Unless you bother to look closely you may not be aware that there are several different systems used to compile the average temperature change for the globe and they do not all agree. We are talking about very small changes here, but this article from WUWT takes a detailed look at why the one that gives the biggest changes (NASA GISS) seems to be wrong.
Tuesday, 21 December 2010
Monday, 20 December 2010
Sunday, 19 December 2010
Saturday, 18 December 2010
A group of climate protestors who planned to occupy and shut down a coal fired power station in Nottingham have been found guilty. This article gives the details. Despite James Hansen being flown over from the USA, this time the jury did not accept a defence of "necessity". It restores your faith in the jury system.
Friday, 17 December 2010
Announcements today by Chris Huhne, the UK climate change minister, will add £500 a year to the average electricity bill according to this Telegraph article. This is definitely on the cards, but because it will take a few years to happen the government are hoping that people will not notice.
Thursday, 16 December 2010
Wednesday, 15 December 2010
UK energy users face a grim future according to this article. Apart from the doubling of electricity and gas bills, businesses also face an extra cost of complying with the government's Carbon Reduction Commitment. Faced with all these extra costs it seems likely that many will be unable to survive.
More on theenergy price rises here.
Tuesday, 14 December 2010
Do you ever get the feeling that the UK is out of step with everyone else? This article highlights one glaring difference in the use of coal. While we continue (almost single-handed, it appears!) to try to "save the planet", the rest of it continues to burn coal quite oblivious to the impending meltdown.
Monday, 13 December 2010
That is according to Christopher Booker. What he means is that the sum saved by increasing tuition fees (£2.9 billion) is equal to the amount the UK has agreed to give to a fund to provide wind turbines etc for the third world. There is a certain irony in so far as it is students (or rather a small minority) who join the demonstrations demanding more for the third world. Be careful what you wish for!
Sunday, 12 December 2010
Saturday, 11 December 2010
This article gives a condensed version of what is being created at Cancun. If true, it is an alarming development akin to what has happened with the EU as it has taken over more and more powers from the member states under the excuse of creating a single market.
Friday, 10 December 2010
This piece on James Delingpole's excellent blog has a guest post by Martin Durkin, the producer of the film "The Great Global Warming Swindle" a brilliant critique of the state of climate science. Durkin explains how the warmists, who try to paint themselves as the only source of pure science, are actually preventing any science contrary to their own beliefs from seeing the light of day.
Thursday, 9 December 2010
Wednesday, 8 December 2010
Shale gas, the new type of natural gas, is transforming the fortunes of the gas industry in the USA. Now it has come to the UK - see this article for details. With these new discoveries it looks as though there will be plenty of gas for the foreseeable future. Not the scenario that alarmists want us to believe.
Tuesday, 7 December 2010
60% cuts in emissions by 2030 is the new target set by the UK Climate Change Committee, according to This article in the Guardian. It sounds completely bonkers, and EUReferendum blog agrees. Why would the UK want to double an already unachievable target when the rest of the world are not even attempting the lower target?
Monday, 6 December 2010
Slowly we find that the mainstream press are coming round to the idea that the so-called consensus on global warming is falling apart. In today's Mail on Sunday we find this article with a very strong sceptic stance. Everywhere, except, it seems at the heart of government, I find doubt surfacing.
Sunday, 5 December 2010
Here is the article. I do wonder whether there is some hidden agenda here, since the amount of CO2 saved is, in reality a tiny proportion of total emissions. Readers of this blog may recall an ingenious way round the new regulations that was highlighted in an earlier post here.
Saturday, 4 December 2010
Here is a link to the video clip of an interview of Two Jags Prescott (former UK Labour Deputy PM) who is setting off to Cancun to tell the world's politicians to cut their CO2 emissions. He just cannot see any hint of hypocrisy in his stance. It is both amusing and yet appalling at the same time, particularly as he models himself on Al Gore!
Friday, 3 December 2010
Thursday, 2 December 2010
Wednesday, 1 December 2010
Tuesday, 30 November 2010
This article suggests it's time to move on in the attempt to control the climate. Apparently making roofs and roads lighter in colour will make a real difference to a large city, reducing temperatures by significant amounts. On the other hand we can limit CO2 and make a difference so insignificant that no one would notice.
Monday, 29 November 2010
There are many problems with much of the data produced by climate scientists. One of them is explained here. This article shows that there are many problems associated with measurements of gases trapped in ice-cores, and yet these ice-core measurements are presented as though they were an accurate record.
Sunday, 28 November 2010
This BBC article reports on the recent appearance of Lord Lawsson in debate at the Confederation of British Industry Conference. I find it rather extraordinary that the headline clearly implies that the CBI is urging for the UK to do more, and yet it is UK industry that will be hit by this. It is a crazy form of masochism to want to see more regulation and more costs and taxes on your businesses, or have I missed something?
Saturday, 27 November 2010
Friday, 26 November 2010
If Lord Stern has his way the world will be heading for trade wars between nations such as the USA who are not imposing a tax on carbon and others such as the EU who do. This article gives more details. As an economist Stern should know that such a war would send the world back into recession. In any case there are a number of nations that emit large quantities of CO2, such as China and India, who have no intention of curbing it, so his warnings are both premature and pointless. The chances of a world-wide agreement look most unlikely.
Thursday, 25 November 2010
This report looks at how climate models have failed to take proper account of the effect of volcanic eruptions. The article confirms yet again the virtual impossibility of setting up computer models that take account of all the variables which affect the climate. They are no better than guesswork, and yet politicians want to place absolute faith in them.
Wednesday, 24 November 2010
This article reveals in the words of a senior IPCC official the real agenda behind the climate change facade, which is redistribution of the world's wealth. It is nothing new to those of us who have followed the subject closely and read what is in the minds of those leading the 'environmental movement'. Now it is explicitly being said by a leading official at the IPCC. When will our leading politicians wake up and start to distance themselves from this - or are they active participants in a scheme to lower the living standards of their own people?
Tuesday, 23 November 2010
New Zealand may be a small country whose output of carbon is insignificant, even by UK standards, but its government has been one of the most enthusiastic proponents of controlling carbon emissions. It is heartening therefore to read this article which states that they are reconsidering their proposal to include agriculture in their emissions trading policy in 2015, unless other nations do the same. The farming lobby in New Zealand has obviously been successful in making its case. Other lobby groups need to take note. The lemming mentality is not the best way forward! The UK government needs to start listening.
Monday, 22 November 2010
Sunday, 21 November 2010
Saturday, 20 November 2010
This Guardian article looks at an attempt to use computer climate models to predict extreme weather events. I would be surprised if the predictions were very accurate. I note that they are attempting to see if they can 'predict' events from the recent past. It will be interesting to see the results.
Friday, 19 November 2010
Thursday, 18 November 2010
Here's a very detailed account of the fifteen month long battle one intrepid citizen (TonyN) had with Ofcom the broadcasting regulator over the failure of Channel 4 to provide any balance when showing the Al Gore film 'An Inconvenient Truth'. It is a rather long account, but it is very interesting in that it demonstrates the head-in-the-sand attitude of our authorities to take any measures to restrict the global warming bandwaggon. The one exception appears to be the High Court Judge who famously found the nine errors in the Gore film. That was a remarkable victory. I have an intimate knowledge of that case and I know that, in fact, the case nearly ended in defeat as before it went before Justice Burton it was heard originally by another judge who ruled it to be 'out of time'. Fortunately the Plaintiff changed his legal team and successfully appealed that decision. It is hard to imagine that many judges would have had the courage to make the decision of Justice Burton. Surely he is a man who cannot be praised too highly, though I suspect there are many 'alarmists' who would disagree. TonyN is thinking of a judicial review of the decision made by Ofcom; something that could be very costly. It is beyond the reach of anyone but the wealthy.
Wednesday, 17 November 2010
Tuesday, 16 November 2010
The UK government is now trying to limit the spread of large solar arrays on fields, according to this article in the Daily Mail. They obviously had not thought that large scale businesses would move in to claim the large subsidies, but that's what happens in a free market economy - when you rig the market it leads to distortion which has unintended consequences.
Monday, 15 November 2010
Alarmists are always stating that "there are no scientific peer-reviewed papers that dispute the theory of catastrophic global warming caused by man-made CO2 emissions". Here is the answer.
Sunday, 14 November 2010
Saturday, 13 November 2010
Friday, 12 November 2010
Thursday, 11 November 2010
Yes, more of our hard-earned money is being used to remove CO2 from the gas emitted from natural gas-fired power plants, according to this report. When will our government stop robbing the people for such pointless exercises?
Wednesday, 10 November 2010
Tuesday, 9 November 2010
Monday, 8 November 2010
Sunday, 7 November 2010
Yet another example of manufacturing being driven abroad by the plethora of 'green' taxes alleged to be imposed to save us from 'global warming'. See this Telegraph article for the details. The irony is that these jobs are going to places where emissions restrictions are less onerous. In other words actual emissions will probably rise - but the UK government will be able to say that their CO2 emissions have reduced. When is this point being made on TV news broadcasts?
Saturday, 6 November 2010
Friday, 5 November 2010
Thursday, 4 November 2010
This Telegraph report explains the thinking. Their problem is that they believe a 'bottom-up' approach is needed led by the people. What they can't contemplate is that a majority of the people do not believe there is a problem. Only a small number of activists are lobbying governments to do more on global warming. What we need is for more of the majority to lobby the government to stop wasting our money on pointless attempts to control the climate. Maybe Climate Fools Day will be the start. (see yesterday's post)
Wednesday, 3 November 2010
Tuesday, 2 November 2010
Monday, 1 November 2010
Sunday, 31 October 2010
One of the best websites for news of climate change/global warming is Lord Lawson's Global Warming Policy Foundation (link on right hand side). Here they look at the coming 'end of year' temperature average and what it actually means. Devotees of the climate change religion are hoping for a sign that they are right and the world is undergoing 'significant' warming, but it looks more than likely that it will just be another ordinary year.
Saturday, 30 October 2010
Those dedicated few with the time can watch the latest instalment of the inquiry into the leaked emails via the House of Commons Select Committee. Exciting it is not, but the implications are clear as this report on Climate Audit explains. Either the Inquiries were sloppy, or they were deliberately deceitful. In either case, as Steve McIntyre explains, they must not be allowed to get away with it.
Thursday, 28 October 2010
Wednesday, 27 October 2010
Tuesday, 26 October 2010
According to this report in the Economist the Australian Government is considering some form of carbon tax. This is a government propped up by a few independents and one Green MP. Here is an example of how a small minority can exploit a very close election result.
Monday, 25 October 2010
Christopher Booker turns his attention to the UK Budget this week, and reminds us that while we have cuts at home he is increasing spending on overseas aid, including large amounts for schemes to cut carbon emissions, and even some for the Indian space programme. All this when we are up to our necks in debt with the interest alone rising to £190 billion a year.
Sunday, 24 October 2010
I have not read any climate sceptic articles by Charles Moore before, but this one puts his views squarely in the sceptic camp. I expect this shift represents the beginning of a trickle in the direction of common sense. Where Charles Moore goes today, many others will follow.
Saturday, 23 October 2010
Friday, 22 October 2010
This article by the redoubtable James Delingpole, throws the spotlight on the new scare story set to replace global warming as the big issue on which the UN wants to extract massive amounts of the West's taxes and hand it over to the third world. Now that the UK government has woken up to the fact that we can no longer afford to allow millions of unemployed people to live comfortably on benefits, you would think they might be more careful to look after our taxes, but don't count on it.
Thursday, 21 October 2010
Wednesday, 20 October 2010
Tuesday, 19 October 2010
Monday, 18 October 2010
Sunday, 17 October 2010
Saturday, 16 October 2010
The UK government ad campaign featuring crying bunnies and drowning puppies to illustrate the perils of global warming have been ruled as OK by Ofcom, according to this article. No surprise there! Maybe this will lead to even more ridiculous ads, as long as the wording is couched in 'could' and 'maybe'.
Friday, 15 October 2010
Thursday, 14 October 2010
This article gives details of the claims made by government minister, Tim Yeo, who likens the war against Nazi Germany to the fight against global warming. Some may think he is a bit over the top, others that he is completely off the wall. I leave you to read it yourself and make up your own mind.
Wednesday, 13 October 2010
This article looks at the letter of resignation of Professor Hal Lewis from the American Physical Society. His wrods are very apposite and show a great strength of character. I doubt it will lead to an avalanche of similar resignations, but nevertheless it is an important contribution.
Tuesday, 12 October 2010
According to this article the New Zealand government are distancing themselves from their scientists' temperature records. ItAll sounds familiar and reminiscent of the fiddling that has already been revealed in the climategate emails. I wonder why this will not appear on the TV news?
Monday, 11 October 2010
Sunday, 10 October 2010
Saturday, 9 October 2010
The latest from Christopher Booker looks at the political legacy of the new Labour leader, Ed Miliband, and he rightly claims it will be the 700 billion pound cost of the UK Climate Change Act, and the visible evidence of the great wind farms will be the lasting manifestation of our stupidity in believing that we can control the climate. In the coming centuries citizens will visit the great statues to Milibandius, the man who championed the most costly and pointless legislation in the history of the UK.
Friday, 8 October 2010
Leading politicians seem to be consistently talking the talk on global warming as though the science was still settled. There is certainly no desire from any major party in the UK to re-visit the science. Here is UK Foreign Secretary, William Hague trotting out the whole mantra, urging world leaders to greater efforts to 'prevent the worst effects of climate change', as though he is utterly convinced that climate change is preventable. Can he really believe this stuff? Personally, I doubt it.
Thursday, 7 October 2010
Here it is on the agenda for discussion - global cooling. These people are normally well-informed, so it seems that at the highest level our leaders are considering the problems of a cooling planet. I wonder if this new concern will be reported in the mainstream media?
Wednesday, 6 October 2010
No doubt the scientists behind them would rather we did not have the answer, but in fact it is 50 years since the first predictions were made and so there is now hard evidence available as this article shows. On reading the evidence it becomes clear that the predictions have not been fulfilled. It points to the conclusion that it is impossible to predict the climate, which is born out by the accuracy of short-term forecasts, as we all know.
Tuesday, 5 October 2010
Further to the earlier post and update, here is more coverage on EUReferendum Blog on what is becoming known as "splattergate", the attempt at humour by the 10:10 Campaign Team led by Franny Armstrong. It seems that they have met a storm of protests and even sponsers are now pulling out. It couldn't be much worse for them - what a shame!
Monday, 4 October 2010
When thermometer records showed that the 1930's was the hottest decade in the USA during the past century it posed an awkward problem for those who wanted to claim that the planet was getting hotter. However with some sleight of hand more usually seen in the magic circle, the boffins at the US Historic Climate Network (USHCN)have been able to fix those lying thermometers and all is well, as you can read here.
Sunday, 3 October 2010
Here Christopher Booker takes the lid off unsavoury goings on with Dr Pachauri, IPCC Chairman, and the UK Charity Commission. It has all the hallmarks of collusion and cover-up. Yet more evidence of corruption in high places to further the cause of alarmist propaganda.
Yes it's true, the man behind Al Quaeda and numerous terrorist atrocities now claims to want to save the planet, according to this report. While this at first seems ludicrous, on reflection, and in the light yesterday's post there is, perhaps, not such a difference between the two after all.
Saturday, 2 October 2010
They are a funny lot the 'eco-warriors', as this piece on EUReferendum testifies.
Here's another person who found this offensive. It seems as though this video has done their cause more harm than good, even though this Guardian article and this Telegraph piece are supportive. But it takes all sorts, as they say!
UPDATE - Here are the take-offs! And even more here. It seems that this has really touched a nerve, causing a massive backlash. This is the danger with propaganda.
Friday, 1 October 2010
As a result of pressure from its own members the Royal Society has been forced to replace its original highly alarmist climate change rhetoric with something much more circumspect, as this Daily Mail article explains. Another victory for common sense over propaganda. One by one the alarmist propaganda is being unmasked, without much fanfare by the media, admittedly. For those who take an interest it is having an impact,no doubt.
Thursday, 30 September 2010
Many people have been seduced into parting with £10 - 12,000 for solar panels under the impression that the very generous feed-in tariffs were to remain fixed for years to come. Now, according to this Financial Times article, it seems that the government are already having second thoughts. Quite right too - we simply cannot afford these absurdly high subsidies.
Wednesday, 29 September 2010
Tuesday, 28 September 2010
This article highlights new evidence that some climatologists have underestimated the role of the ocean currents in affecting our climate. The idea that CO2 has a major influence is unravelling by the day, but will it be given any prominence in the media?
Monday, 27 September 2010
Sunday, 26 September 2010
When the queen starts to notice the cost of fuel it must be really obvious to the rest of us. If Her Majesty needs support then it's time to stop putting up prices by government taxes and subsidies. Perhaps her son, Prince Charles will put in a good word, instead of making his mission to save the planet his main priority
Saturday, 25 September 2010
Friday, 24 September 2010
This report reveals how our Climate Change Minister, Lib Dem Chris Huhne, is trying to frighten us into accepting a huge rise in fossil fuels, hoping that this will lead to acceptance of his huge cost of decarbonising the energy and transport sector. Of course if there was a general shift away from fossil fuels this would lead to a surplus of supply and prices would not rise as he anticipates, whereas in reality this will not happen as it must be perfectly clear that we will still rely on fossil fuels for the forseeable future, despite the best efforts of Mr Huhne. What is driving price increases is the increase in government taxes coupled with the huge subsidies given to so-called 'green energy' such as the inefficient wind farms.
Thursday, 23 September 2010
I like to call myself a climate realist, meaning that I believe myself to be a person who looks at the evidence and tries to weigh it up and come to a logical conclusion. From my point of view it seems as though the alarmists have had a great deal of influence on the behaviour of governments resulting in massive expenditure and taxation. It is therefore very interesting to read this viewpoint from George Monbiot in which he insists that the global warming prevention campaign has ended in failure. Much of what he says does make sense, in that all government carbon reduction schemes are in reality a fraud. Putting up the costs of energy simply adds to the cost of living while emissions remain broadly the same, or else it results in industry closing and jobs and emissions going abroad while world emissions go on rising.
As I have said many times before, what we are getting is all pain for no gain. Despite the failure of governments, we are fortunate in this case that the runaway warming shows no signs of happening and even if it did there is no evidence that CO2 is likely to be the cause.
Wednesday, 22 September 2010
Tuesday, 21 September 2010
Monday, 20 September 2010
This statement by Caroline Spelman MP, our Environment Minister, shows the government is still wedded to drastic (and expensive) measures to mitigate and adapt to global warming - in spite of the mounting evidence that our climate is still well within the range that it has always been in and even Prof Phil Jones (Head of CRU) was forced to admit that we have had no significant global warming for the past 15 years. The government would rather 'go with the flow' than look closely at the science. How very sad!
Sunday, 19 September 2010
Saturday, 18 September 2010
If the establishment thought they could get away with weak, one-sided inquiries into the climategate affair, then they must be getting a little anxious as more media coverage opens up their short-comings. Parliament, it appears, has realised that more needs to be done. The truth will out!
Friday, 17 September 2010
No, it's not a new disaster movie (yet!), but a new name for global warming (or climate change as some call it). Apparently the alarmists are not winning hearts and minds because they chose the wrong name, according to this article. The trouble is that when you resort to too many name changes people begin to notice and credibility is lost. This seems a desperate measure by some important but desperate people. If only they understood - it's the FACTS WHICH COUNT!
Thursday, 16 September 2010
Tuesday, 14 September 2010
This report in the Scoteman tells the sorry tale of how the Scots are being bled by their oh so Green government to the tume of £8 billion. It will result in cuts to front-line services. Let's hope the people let them know what they think at the next election.
Monday, 13 September 2010
Sunday, 12 September 2010
Here is a link to a video showing a young person who appears to be brain-washed into believing the most exaggerated claims of climate alarmism. It makes you think just how malleable the minds of young people are to propaganda. Even if these are only a small minority of young people they may well be the extremists of tomorrow. When we see the behaviour of muslim extremists today it is a chilling thought that we may find a new form of extremism is being created today.
Saturday, 11 September 2010
Friday, 10 September 2010
This report on the House of Commons Science Committee interview with Lord Oxburgh reveals what a feeble inquiry it was. What is needed is a full public inquiry into the whole state of our knowledge of global warming, but of course, the government would not want that, as it would be likely to reveal the truth - which is that the science is patchy and incomplete with very little certainty at all.
If anyone is interested in seeing the Science Select Committee interviewing Lord Oxburgh - Here is a link.
Thursday, 9 September 2010
Wednesday, 8 September 2010
Tuesday, 7 September 2010
Monday, 6 September 2010
Below is a very interesting report by Matt Ridley in the Times. His "journey" is both interesting and instructive.
September 04, 2010
This month, after a three-year investigation, Harvard University suspended
a prominent professor of psychology for scandalously overinterpreting
videos of monkey behaviour.
The incident has sent shock waves through science because it suggests a
body of data is unreliable. The professor, Marc Hauser, is now a pariah in
his field and his papers have been withdrawn. But the implications for
society are not great; no policy had been based on his research.
This week, after a four-month review, a committee of scientists concluded
that the Nobel prizewinning UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
has "assigned high confidence to statements for which there is very little
evidence, has failed to enforce its own guidelines, has been guilty of too
little transparency, has ignored critical review comments and has had no
policies on conflict of interest".
Enormous and expensive policy changes have been based on the flawed work
of these scientists. Yet there is apparently to be no investigation,
blame, suspension or withdrawal of papers, just a gentle bureaucratic
fattening of the organisation with new full-time posts.
IPCC reports are supposed to be the gold standard account of what is - and
is not - known about global warming. The panel boasts that it uses only
peer-reviewed scientific literature.
But its claims about mountain ice turned out to be anecdotes from a
climbing magazine, its claims on the Amazon's vulnerability to drought
from a Brazilian pressure group's website and 42 per cent of the
references in one chapter proved to be to reports by Greenpeace, World
Wildlife Fund and other "grey" literature.
This week's review finds guidelines on the use of this grey literature
"are vague and have not always been followed".
For instance, the claim that glaciers in the Himalayas would disappear by
2035 seems to have been based on a misprint (for 2350) in a document
issued by a pressure group. When several reviewers challenged the
assertion in draft, they were ignored.
When Indian scientists challenged it after publication, they were not just
dismissed but vilified and accused of "voodoo science" by IPCC chairman
By contrast, when two academics, Ross McKitrick and Pat Michaels, found a
strong link between temperature rise and local economic development -
implying that recent warming is partly down to local, not global factors -
their paper was ignored for two drafts, despite many review comments
drawing attention to the omission. It was finally given a grudging
reference, with a false assertion that the data was rebutted by other data
that turned out to be nonexistent.
We now know the back story of this episode: the emails leaked from the
University of East Anglia include this from professor Phil Jones,
referring to exactly this paper: "I can't see either of these papers being
in the next IPCC report. Kevin and I will keep them out somehow - even if
we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!"
(Note that the IPCC had appointed Jones as co-ordinating lead author to
pass judgment on his own papers as well as those of his critics. Learning
nothing, it has appointed one of Jones's closest colleagues for the next
report. This is asking not to be taken seriously.)
These are not merely procedural issues. They have real consequences for
science and society. All the errors and biases that have come to light in
recent months swerve in the direction of exaggerating the likely effect of
According to economist Richard Tol, one part of the 2007 report (produced
by Working Group 2) systematically overstated the adverse effects of
climate change, while another section (written by Working Group 3)
systematically understated the costs of emissions reduction. Indur
Goklany, an independent science scholar, likewise noticed that the report
had quoted a study that estimated the number of people at increased risk
of (reduced? BB) water shortage in the future as a result of climate
change, but omitted to mention the same source's estimate of the number of
people at decreased risk.
The latter number was larger in all cases, so that "by the 2080s the net
global population at risk declines by up to 2.1 billion people".
This is not a new problem. The unilateral redrafting of IPCC reports by
lead authors after reviewers had agreed them, and the writing of a
sexed-up "summary for policymakers" before the report was complete, have
discomfited many scientists since the first report. It is no great
surprise that the experts who compiled one part of the 2007 report
included three from Greenpeace, two Friends of the Earth representatives,
two Climate Action Network representatives and a person each from the
activist organisations WWF, Environmental Defence Fund and the David
Frankly, the whole process, not just the discredited Pachauri (in
shut-eyed denial at a press conference this week), needs purging or it
will drag down the reputation of science with it.
One of the most shocking things for those who champion science, as I do,
has been the sight of the science establishment reacting to each scandal
in climate science with indifference or contempt. The contrast with the
thorough investigation of the Hauser affair is striking.
Three years ago, not having paid much attention, I thought IPCC reports
were reliable, fair and transparent. No longer.
Despite coming from a long line of coalmining entrepreneurs, I'm not a
denier: I think carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas. I'm not even a sceptic
(yet): I think the climate has warmed and will warm further.
But I am now a "lukewarmer" who has yet to see any evidence saying that
the present warming is, or is likely to be, unprecedented, fast or tending
So I have concluded that global warming will most probably be a fairly
minor problem - at least compared with others such as poverty and habitat
loss - for nature as well as people.
After watching the ecologically and economically destructive policies
enacted in its name (biofuels, wind power), I think we run the risk of
putting a tourniquet around our collective necks to stop a nosebleed.
Matt Ridley is the author of The Rational Optimist: How Prosperity Evolves
Sunday, 5 September 2010
Saturday, 4 September 2010
Friday, 3 September 2010
Here is the link to the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee giving the details of an interview with Lord Oxburgh. They should ask him why he claimed he was not tasked to look at the science (- see this post on Climate Audit) when his inquiry was described as an "inquiry into the science".
Thursday, 2 September 2010
Wednesday, 1 September 2010
Tuesday, 31 August 2010
This article explains how some of the temperature measuring equipment aboard weather satellites has been degraded over time leading to inaccurate measurements. Some of the recorded readings were out by over 100%. The question is - can we trust the accuracy of the rest of it?
Monday, 30 August 2010
I must confess that I am not familiar with the Stockholm Environment Institute, but I could not resist highlighting this news release about "older people and climate change". What the authors of this patronising piece seem to overlook is that more older folk can see through this sort of stuff and will give them the benefit of their knowledge. The worst thing about this is that they are largely funded indirectly by you and me.
Sunday, 29 August 2010
Saturday, 28 August 2010
Friday, 27 August 2010
Thursday, 26 August 2010
Willow cuttings and peanut shells are among the materials to be burnt along with coal. This article gives the details. Apart from the large cost of converting the burners to take the new fuel, there is also concern about all the tar being released. Apparently they are also going to attempt to capture the CO2 emissions. It sounds like they are going to produce some very expensive electricity - and we are all going to pay for it!
Wednesday, 25 August 2010
Tuesday, 24 August 2010
Monday, 23 August 2010
Sunday, 22 August 2010
There is an opportunity for anyone to make formal comments about the IPCC and its processes and procedures regarding "Global Warming".
The IAC (InterAcademy Council) has been tasked to review the whole IPCC matter and they are now collecting public commentary. [For the press release earlier this year on that, see this link - http://www.interacademycouncil.net/?id=12852.]
Go here for the simple form to fill out: http://reviewipcc.interacademycouncil.net/comments.html
Here is a good article about some of the submissions:
Not sure as to how balanced or detailed the resulting critique will be, but if we don't participate, we can hardly complain about the results.
Saturday, 21 August 2010
This report at a readable 8 pages gives a thorough look at present and future taxes and levies that are allegedly designed to reduce our carbon emissions.
It has been alleged that many leading politicians will make themselves very rich by investing in the very industries that they are backing.
Friday, 20 August 2010
Thursday, 19 August 2010
This article draws attention to a serious failure of temperature data gathering by NOAA (the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). The extent of the errors is not clear, but could have implications for the integrity of temperature records for the past decade.
Wednesday, 18 August 2010
Tuesday, 17 August 2010
According to this report in the Daily Mail there is an absurd rush for UK wind farm subsidies by landowners regardless of the suitability of the site. It's a poor lookout for the UK's energy future.
Sunday, 15 August 2010
Friday, 13 August 2010
UK Companies that fail to register their energy use by next month will be hit with fines that could reach £45,000 under the little-known rules of the Carbon Reduction Commitment (CRC). Those that do participate in the initiative by declaring their energy use will face charges for every ton of greenhouse gas they produce. These payments are expected to average £38,000 a year for medium-sized firms, and could reach £100,000 for larger organisations. --James Kirkup, Harry Wallop and Louise Gray, The Daily Telegraph, 11 August 2010
Thursday, 12 August 2010
Wednesday, 11 August 2010
This article gives a flavour of the sort of policies being considered in Australia and New Zealand to try and control emissions. I note that methane emissions will start to be included from 2015. This is bound to increase the price of milk, meat, cheese, butter, etc. and yet have no effect on the climate.
Tuesday, 10 August 2010
We all know the saying "lies,damned lies and statistics". This was never more true than with the controversial earth's surface temperature. This article looks at how the alarmists and the sceptics can seize on different sets of temperatures to make their case. What this really shows is that the figures are far from clear, a point which at least undermines the case for "catastrophic" warming. Yet this is what politicians are claiming is the reason for decarbonising their economy at great expense.
Monday, 9 August 2010
Thursday, 5 August 2010
Here is a link to a summary of a full interview with Piers Corbyn of Weather Action. He is able to produce fairly reliable long-range global weather forecasts based on a number of astronomical measurements, particularly the sun. To read the full interview click on the link and then find the link to the full interview.
Wednesday, 4 August 2010
Today I was reading the EUReferendum blog, as I often do, when I came across a link showing just how much funding the EU is pumping into scientific research into climate change. Here is the link. In the third para there is a link to John Rosenthal's analysis of the EU Connection in Climate Research. What this shows is that very large sums of EU money are being used to effectively buy the answers they want to drive the political aims of the EU in terms of the climate agenda. I highly recommend reading this to tie up the climategate emails and what they really mean for the integrity and freedom of scientific research in this area.
Monday, 2 August 2010
This report about the 2003 European heatwave also talks about earlier heatwaves which were far worse than the more recent ones. Here's another report of exceptionally cold weather in Peru; and here's a further account of the current Russian heatwave . All these reports show is that we are and have always been subject to extremes of weather. None of these reports is evidence of any discernible pattern or of 'climate change'.
Sunday, 1 August 2010
This site gives all the details of this great new source of information for all iphone users who want to gain instant non-alarmist information while on the move. I'm sure this will reach thousands of young people who have been subjected to one-sided propaganda in our schools.
Saturday, 31 July 2010
Sea surface temperatures (SST's) have been falling for the past few months now and continue to do, according to Prof Roy Spencer. I am unable to give the link here due to computer problems, but it is on my list of links on the right hand side if you scroll down. This trend in SST is a prelude to a new La Nina condition which is likely to herald the onset of cooler temperatures across the globe.
Friday, 30 July 2010
One of the main purposes of this website is to provide links to other sites where useful information can be found, hence the extensive list of "links" on the right hand side. Today I have been told of this site which I believe will prove very useful in counter-acting some of the so-called science put out in the media, such as ocean acidification - see here.
Thursday, 29 July 2010
Wednesday, 28 July 2010
Tuesday, 27 July 2010
Monday, 26 July 2010
New Scientist, the best selling science magazine has criticised the latest climategate inquiry, headed by Sir Muir Russell - see here for the details. I am starting to think that these Inquiries have been so pathetic that they are having the opposite effect to what was hoped for, ie they are drawing more attention to the emails and what they really said.
Sunday, 25 July 2010
Saturday, 24 July 2010
There is one incontrovertible argument against unilateral cuts in CO2 emissions by the developed western nations, and that is that unless the new emerging giants such as China and India agree to the same cuts then the result will be that CO2 levels will simply go on rising as industries collapse in the West and the production moves to the new giants taking the wealth and the jobs with them. If you believe that China is embarking on a "low Carbon" economy then read this. The question is - why does our government attempt to deny this reality and saddle us with such futile policies as the Climate Change Act?
Friday, 23 July 2010
According to this article fitting so-called 'carbon capture' to coal-fired power stations would make electricity up to 80% more expensive. This is from a new US government report. Surely the Senate will not vote for such a scheme as carbon trading knowing that these costs will cause a fatal blow to both private consumers and industry.
Thursday, 22 July 2010
This article in the Guardian looks at what the UN are now considering in what might be described as a last-ditch attempt to save their precious carbon-trading dream. Some of the commenters have seen through it and put it very well. No government dares to give away their wealth and prosperity, and that is what they would be signing up to.
Wednesday, 21 July 2010
The IOP (Institute of Physics) made a submission to the inquiry into the Climategate scandal. The submission was quite critical of the CRU scientists. This article explains how the submission was undermined in order to reduce its effect. A very determined piece of work by those who want the alarmist view to prevail.
Tuesday, 20 July 2010
I have just heard of a plan to produce a new climate movie aimed at the youth market. Such a movie is surely needed with all the mis-information currently going through schools. To find out more about this project and how you may be able to help go to this website.
Monday, 19 July 2010
I am sorry to report that I have been experiencing computer problems which has restricted my blogging efforts in recent days. I hope that readers will be understanding and use the excellent links on the right hand side. For news I recommend The Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF) and Watts Up With That (WUWT).
Saturday, 17 July 2010
Friday, 16 July 2010
The whole case for global warming depends on the records of temperatures and how reliable they are. This 200 page book is an in depth look at the issue. The findings in this account would give any reasonable objective person cause for concern. If you don't have time for 200 pages a summary can be read here by James Delingpole.
Thursday, 15 July 2010
Climate change policies risk major damage to the economic recovery
A preoccupation with 'green' energy policies at any cost undermines the competitiveness of manufacturing industry
A newly published report from the independent think tank Civitas reveals that the increased costs of energy arising from 'green' energy policies are set to increase significantly. Increased costs will hurt manufacturing at a time when much depends on the sector to generate the economic growth the country needs, and to rebalance the economy.
In British Energy Policy And The Threat To Manufacturing Industry, Ruth Lea and Jeremy Nicholson examine the impact of the recent Labour Government's policy on energy prices. They argue that Labour's aim to reduce carbon emissions and increase the proportion of energy generated from renewable sources, significantly increased costs for energy consumers. Lea and Nicholson's analysis provides a timely warning because under the new Coalition Government, energy policy could be as damaging to manufacturing industry as it was under Labour.
Business electricity bills already incur a 21% 'surcharge' because of 'green' commitments
Lea and Nicholson cite evidence that the recent Labour Government's climate change strategy hiked up electricity bills. For example, BERR estimated in 2008 that the 'surcharge' on electricity prices, attributable to climate-change policies, amounted to an extra 14% for domestic users and 21% for business. Furthermore, DECC's The Renewable Energy Strategy (2009) suggested that these surcharges could be as high as 33% and 70% by 2020 respectively.
Lea and Nicholson highlight the two major legislative commitments responsible:
1. The Climate Change Act (2008) - including a legally binding target of at least an 80% cut in greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.
2. The EU's Renewables Directive (2008) - under which the UK must meet 15% of its final energy consumption through renewable sources by 2020.
Britain will bear a greater cost than other countries
This country is particularly badly placed for such commitments. First, Britain is starting with a very modest renewables industry, so the burden of the EU's Renewables Directive will be substantial:
'The proportion of renewables to total energy consumption in 2005 was just 1.3%, compared with an EU27 average of 8.5%.' (p.6)
Secondly, even without the extra costs associated with climate change policies that are due to be imposed, Lea and Nicholson argue, Britain's industrial electricity prices already tend to be amongst the highest of any major economy. This puts British business and, in particular, energy intensive users at a cost and international competitiveness disadvantage. Moreover, given the expected increases in the climate change surcharges, Britain's cost disadvantage will almost certainly increase, thus undermining competitiveness further.
'Such extra costs would inevitably tilt the balance for many businesses and render them unviable in Britain.' (p.10)
Energy intensive industries to be hardest hit
- with a domino effect on downstream industries
Energy intensive users, including steel, glass and ceramics, bulk chemicals, industrial gases and cement, are especially vulnerable. These are important contributors to GDP not only in their own right but also because of their inter-dependent relationship with 'downstream' industries. As Jeremy Nicholson comments:
'Britain is already losing energy intensive businesses because of the lack of competitiveness... There is no doubt that high energy prices have already been a factor behind industry closures.' (pp.10-11)
Lea and Nicholson outline specific examples of the layers of 'fall out' from such closures - for example, the INEOS Chlor plant in Cheshire manufactures chlorine and caustic soda which are vital inputs to a wide-range of 'downstream' industries including disinfectants, plastics, pharmaceuticals, soaps and detergents.
'Rather than import the basic chemicals, many of the downstream businesses would migrate to countries where they were still domestically produced for reasons of reliability of supply and transport costs.' (p.13)
Policy must help rather than hinder
As the economy struggles to emerge from the economic crisis of 2008-2009, it is widely assumed that the manufacturing sector will contribute positively to the general recovery and the rebalancing of the economy. Under these circumstances, the report calls on the new Coalition Government to ensure that manufacturing industries are supported by policies that help rather than hinder their competitiveness to enable economic growth and therefore lead to fewer public spending cuts. According to Ruth Lea:
"The economy desperately needs a competitive and thriving manufacturing sector if it is to prosper. Competitive energy prices are vital to the success of manufacturers, especially energy intensive users. Government energy policies are, however, remorselessly driving up energy costs thus risking the 'migration' of manufacturing plants to economies where the costs are lower." To read the full booklet use this link.
Wednesday, 14 July 2010
This article refers to a new peer-reviewed paper which suggests that CFCs, rather than CO2, were responsible for the recent warming of the 1980's and 1990's. The paper, which can be read from a link in the article, concludes that, since CFCs have now been banned and are declining, the future leads not to warming but to cooling. An interesting hypothesis.
Tuesday, 13 July 2010
This report in the Daily Express says MP Graham Stringer, who was on the original parliamentary inquiry into the leaked climate emails, has called the latest review by Sir Muir Russell 'inadequate' and wants parliament to look into it further.
More on this here
Monday, 12 July 2010
The new coalition government, in the person of Nick Clegg (Deputy PM), has started a website in which members of the public are invited to put forward legislation that they want to see scrapped. One suggestion on the site is the scrapping of the Climate Change Act which sets out the UK's unilateral programme of decarbonisation.
The link to the suggestion is Here. I have added it on the side bar for ease of finding it. I'm sure Nick Clegg would love to see this measure receive your support (NOT!). I have no doubt they will avoid repealing this, but wouldn't it be delightfully embarrassing if it got so much support that they squirmed a bit. Before you can comment and rate an idea you have to register which is quite easy to do.
Sunday, 11 July 2010
Here is a new site which highlights the on-going propaganda emanating in our schools. There is no doubt that there is a very big effort being promoted to indoctrinate school students. Since the Gore film case this has taken other forms. Visit this blog to see what's happening.
Saturday, 10 July 2010
Friday, 9 July 2010
Thursday, 8 July 2010
Wednesday, 7 July 2010
This report confirms the Muir Russell report was another feeble review into the climategate emails. We have now had three whitewashes which is no surprise to most. However they do not fool anyone who has read these emails which clearly show that these scientists were working to conceal the weakness of their work and trying to prevent other scientists from getting their work published while preventing their own data from being accessed.
Here, if proof were needed, is the evidence that the Oxburgh Inquiry was a feeble attempt to whitewash those involved in the CRU email scandal. How can these people be allowed to get away with it? Is there no one in parliament who can hold them to account?
Tuesday, 6 July 2010
Monday, 5 July 2010
Sunday, 4 July 2010
The problem with understanding such massive and complex things as climate ans ocean circulation is that there is still so much we simply do not know. In this interesting article the ocean conveyer theory which has been taught as a fact for around 50 years is know seriously being challenged by leading experts.
Saturday, 3 July 2010
Friday, 2 July 2010
This piece from the Earth Times (not a publication I often refer to!) makes a very interesting observation on the recent press release from the G20 - 'They went through this document with a vacuum cleaner to remove any reference to clean energy. In the Pittsburgh G20 summit (in September 2009), there were 8 references to 'clean energy' - in this one, there is zero," WWF climate expert Kim Carstensen said.
I don't believe this could happen by accident. Clearly there must be major disagreements on this issue.
Thursday, 1 July 2010
This report highlights a real danger from CO2 when it is in very high concentrations. In this case it is being emitted naturally by volcanic activity, but this could be caused if the gas is artificially stored undeground and then leaks out. It is certainly something which cannot be ignored, just like the storage of nuclear waste.
Wednesday, 30 June 2010
Tuesday, 29 June 2010
Monday, 28 June 2010
Sunday, 27 June 2010
This report gives the details of how a school board has heeded the complaints of a few informed parents and removed a book and video with blatant false claims and political dogma. How many schools are using this type of material which goes unchallenged, I wonder?
Saturday, 26 June 2010
This report tells us that Ms Gillard is a'pragmatic' political leader (aren't they all today?). Her policy is determined by what gives her the votes.
This piece in The Australian should be a warning to all leaders that if a good opposition stands up against these emission trading schemes then governments can quickly lose their popularity. The new Aussie PM is between a rock and a hard place as this article suggests.
Friday, 25 June 2010
In a case very similar to the Kingsnorth Power Station case, this article explains how the jury are being given lectures in climate change, presumably so that the defendants can claim that their actions were necessary. So the madness continues. What I cannot understand is why the prosecution do not bring in some "experts" to refute this "evidence". I expect the reason is that no one wants to be seen to be "off message".
This article from the Financial Post explains how the Spanish government are considering reneging on the over-generous subsidies given to producers of solar electricity. The result, according to those in the industry will be mass bankruptcy of many firms. When will they ever learn?
Thursday, 24 June 2010
This article gives the thinking of the new coalition government in the UK on how to encourage new nuclear power plants. Instead of offering them a subsidy they will guarantee a dearer price for electricity by putting a lower limit on the price of carbon. This is not great news for consumers or industry, as we can look forward to an exodus of industry and more expensive electricity. I think the public should be told.
Wednesday, 23 June 2010
Tuesday, 22 June 2010
Monday, 21 June 2010
Sunday, 20 June 2010
Saturday, 19 June 2010
Friday, 18 June 2010
Thursday, 17 June 2010
This link is to an audio recording of the testimony. Of particular interest is the tesimony of Prof. John Christy which can be found by going to the first session and looking from just over half way through it. Prof. Christy's forthright views would, if adopted, lead to a much more realistic assessment of climate science.
More details of the review here.
Wednesday, 16 June 2010
Tuesday, 15 June 2010
Monday, 14 June 2010
Sunday, 13 June 2010
If, like me, you would love to see the chief advocates of the global warming theory cross examined thoroughly in a public inquiry, then you can read this paper by a university law professor. At around 80 pages it is a serious piece of work, but as I don't expect James Hansen, Al Gore and co to submit themselves anytime soon it is the best we'll get.
Saturday, 12 June 2010
This article in the Toronto Sun makes a fair point about the massive cost of staging these global summits, such as the current one in Canada. Are they simply a gigantic bean-fest for leaders to strut about making out they are doing things, when in fact these things could be done at a fraction of the cost using video-conferencing? Will the mdia also condemn the 'climate conferences' for the same reason?
Friday, 11 June 2010
Thursday, 10 June 2010
This story in the Scotsman gives the details of comments made by TV maths and science presenter Johnny Ball ahead of his talk on the subject.
Wednesday, 9 June 2010
Tuesday, 8 June 2010
Monday, 7 June 2010
When it comes to going green, Mr Cameron could do no better than read this piece from the Washington Post. It points out with great clarity that inefficient forms of energy can only ever be taken up by using large carrots or big sticks with which to bribe or beat us. In our current financial plight we can afford neither.
Sunday, 6 June 2010
The next time you meet someone who says that scientists have a good level of understanding of the causes of global warming you could refer them to this table (2.11) from the 4th IPCC Report, Working Group 2. You will need to scroll down to page 200 (chapter 2) to see the table which displays sideways. This table lists 16 factors which the IPCC identify as contributing to global warming (they use the term 'radiative forcing' to describe this). The interesting thing about the table is that out of these 16, for only one of them does the IPCC claim to have a high level of scientific understanding (LOSU). For two of them there is a 'medium' LOSU, another two 'medium/low', six have a 'low' LOSU, and five 'very low'. It should be noted that the 16 factors are only the ones known to the IPCC; there are probably several others as yet unknown altogether. It is from these 'forcings that they feed in the information into the computers to give their predictions of future temperatures over the coming century.It seems extraordinary that the science which world governments put so much faith in is based on such meagre understanding.
Saturday, 5 June 2010
Friday, 4 June 2010
This is the second time recently that climate alarmists have been defeated in university debates - see here. It would appear that, despite the relentless propaganda in schools in favour of the alarmists, intelligent young people remain unconvinced. This is very encouraging news.
Thursday, 3 June 2010
Wednesday, 2 June 2010
This report refers to a recent BBC radio programme in which the idea of suspending democracy in order to implement draconian CO2 emission controls was discussed. While the BBC must be free to have editorial control over its output, it must also have due regard to 'balance' as a public service broadcaster. It seems to have failed that test here, and James Delingpole is right to draw our attention to it.
Tuesday, 1 June 2010
Monday, 31 May 2010
This report explains how the Scottish parliament is having to cut its target for CO2 emissions as the original targets have been found to be much too ambitious. The really crazy things is that the opposition parties are fighting to have the original targets re-instated. A truly pointless piece of grandstanding which even the most ardent alarmist must admit would have no effect whatsoever on world CO2 levels.
Sunday, 30 May 2010
Saturday, 29 May 2010
Friday, 28 May 2010
This BBC report gives the details of what could be a very significant change, as the Royal Society is the most high profile scientific body in the UK. The tectonic plates may be slowly shifting on this issue. A further report here gives some details.
Thursday, 27 May 2010
Wednesday, 26 May 2010
This report in the Independent explains the concerns of the hardliners that the Tories will dilute the Lib Dems policies. I only hope they are right, but even so both parties are wedded to the discredited CO2 Theory for the time being.
Tuesday, 25 May 2010
If, like me, you missed attending the recent Heartland Climate Conference in Chicago, then here are a lot of the presentations from the many top climate scientists and others. I guarantee you will not have seen any of it on mainstream TV. Enjoy!
This report explains the decision of the new government. As expected, when reality hits home they have to make some good decisions. They should now go further and faster and ditch the whole nonsense, but that may take a bigger crisis, which could happen if the Euro goes belly-up.