To emphasise its claim that there is no convincing evidence using the acknowledged scientific method that carbon dioxide (CO2) can or does cause temperature warming beyond natural cyclical limits long observed and recorded, the New Zealand Climate Science Coalition has offered to New Zealanders the Professor Augie Auer prize of $NZ10,000, to be granted to the first applicant to present real-world evidence showing that the man-made fraction of airborne carbon dioxide causes dangerous global warming.
Scientists have long known that the ocean plays an essential role in capturing carbon from the atmosphere, but a new study from Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI) shows that the efficiency of the ocean’s “biological carbon pump” has been drastically underestimated, with implications for future climate assessments. In a paper published April 6 in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, WHOI geochemist Ken Buesseler and colleagues demonstrated that the depth of the sunlit area where photosynthesis occurs varies significantly throughout the ocean. This matters because the phytoplankton’s ability to take up carbon depends on amount of sunlight that’s able to penetrate the ocean’s upper layer.
Our leading metro paper, New Zealand Herald, has just reprinted from the "Financial Times" an article challenging the convential wisdom about "climate change". The artcle says: "It's a fallacy explored by Bjorn Lomborg in his book, False Alarm. The main threat to polar bears was not changing climate, he claims, but (now curbed) wild hunting. 'If we want to protect [polar bears], rather than dramatically reducing carbon dioxide emissions to try to tweak temperatures over many decades with a clearly uncertain impact . . . our first step should be to stop shooting them,' he writes. Lomborg's is one of two books that set out to challenge what one might call 'climate miserabilism'. The other is Apocalypse Never by Michael Shellenberger, an American environmentalist turned pro-nuclear campaigner. They explore the way in which climate policy is increasingly shaped by emotive, alarmist and sometimes misleading messages."
For anyone unable to open the Herald page. the text is here in pdf:
In a break-through paper just accepted for publication by the International Journal of Atmospheric & Ocean Sciences, U.S. physicist, Dr Edwin Berry shows that natural and human CO2 do not “add” CO2 to the atmosphere. Both natural and human CO2 “flow through” the atmosphere. As CO2 flows through the atmosphere, it raises the level of atmospheric CO2 just enough so CO2 outflow equals CO2 inflow. Nature balances CO2 in the atmosphere when outflow equals inflow.
Dr Berry comments on the release of his break-through paper:
Climate change alarmism is based entirely on speculation, not on science. Alarmism per se is not a hoax, because people really believe it. But alarmism is driven by a repeated practice that is in fact a hoax. This common hoax is the presentation of speculative conclusions as though they were established scientific facts about the physical world. The standard definition of a hoax is a deliberate deception that is intended to fool a lot of people. The scientists and journalists who falsely report speculations as facts know perfectly well what they are doing, which makes what they do a hoax.
One of our American members, Dr Thomas P Sheahen has reviewed at "WattsUpWithThat" the latest book by Danish analyst Professor Bjorn Lomborg. Tom concludes: "Lomborg has a compelling case, and he makes it quite clearly with common-sense reasoning, a grasp of numerical values, and a comfortable writing style. It contains no equations, only graphs. Everyone who is concerned about pursuing the best approach to climate change will find merit in reading this book. "
Indian analyst, Sanjeev Sahblok writes in the 'Times of India" that the current level of carbon dioxide (CO2) in Earth's atmosphere is low by historical standards, and has no significant adverse effect on global temperatures. He says the UN IPCC is trying to "fix" a "problem" that doesn't exist.
Matt Ridley rebuts biodiversity alarmism at Reaction.Life: "Driven perhaps by envy at the attention that climate change is getting, and ambition to set up a great new intergovernmental body that can fly scientists to mega-conferences, biologists have gone into overdrive on the subject of biodiversity this week.
Dr Jay Lehr and Tom Harris post at World Commerce Review: "Most of the periodic temperature increases and decreases observed in human history are average amount of the energy that we receive from the Sun. The mild heating and cooling per degrees Fahrenheit reflect changes in solar activity rather than exponential increase in temperature from 1880 to 1935 as the Littlre Ice Age ended. It decreased from 1935 to 1990, and has since levelled off. Temperature changes do not mirror emission changes."
Australian geologist Peter Purcell produces evidence that many Pacific Islands, rather than sinking as claimed by climate alarmists and some money-hungry island leaders, are actually increasing in size due to a combination of the intrinsic nature of atolls and Pacific-area tectonic plate movements.
Canadian climatologist Dr Tim Ball writes: "I will not apologize for my outrage at being lectured to about my moral obligations concerning climate change from the likes of Benjamin Santer, from his position at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. Ironically, and sadly, he is right that we need to address climate change, but for the wrong reason. We need to address the false science about climate change and global warming he was part of creating and perpetuating almost from the start. We need to address and stop the use of science for a political agenda, as his latest pontificating illustrates."
"There are many real environmental problems, but the slow, gentle, net beneficial warming to be expected after correction of climate scientists’ long standing and costly error of physics is not among them. The panoply of climate rules, restrictions, taxes, imposts, conferences, speeches and treaties...
Posted 18 February 2009
"The hysteria surrounding the concept of 'global warming' will fade over the years. People will see that the apocalyptic forecasts are not coming true. Today there is no fingerprint attesting that carbon dioxide emission causes a rise in temperature. A Grad missile that falls in Sderot should be more cause for concern." Professor Nir Shaviv, Hebrew University, Israel.
This is the story journalist Doron Levin wrote for Forbes magazine in America about the scientific research by Professor Nir Shaviv and Professor Henrik Svensmark, two members of the GWPF’s Academic Advisory Council. The Forbes editor, however, doesn’t seem to like the piece and has therefore removed it from its website. We post the censored story here for interested readers to make up their own minds about the research by Nir Shaviv and Henrik Svensmark.
What Professor Shaviv himself says about this:
Thanks to Australian colleague, Professor Cliff Ollier, we are able to post papers from the Porto Climate Conference 2018 (7/8 September) held at Porto University, Portugal. These papers are a veritable treasure trove of the scientific realities of climate change, countering all of the alarmist propaganda topics. Papers begin at page 9, download takes a few seconds, but well worth reading in full.
Lnk here to individual presentations: Link to presentations
"Solar energy can do a few useful things. It can power a radio in an off-grid location. But it can’t support our day-to-day life. The sun’s incoming energy is extremely dilute, requiring panels spread over vast swathes of land to absorb it, thus pushing out forests and harming biodiversity. The 648 MW Kamuthi solar plant in Tamil Nadu covers ten square kilometres. A tenth of that land would have been sufficient for a larger capacity nuclear facility." Indian political leader Sanjeev Sahblok writes in the Times of India. (A Pigovian tax is a tax on any market activity that generates externalities - costs not included in the market price).
In two separate reports, members of the New Zealand Climate Science Coalition have debunked alarmist propaganda that methane emitted by agricultural livestock makes any meaningful contribution to global warming.
Full Allison/Sheahen paper Allison Sheahen.pdf
Report in Rural News: Link to report in Rural News
Report by Emeritus Professor Geoff Duffy: Link to Duffy paper
In a lecture to the UK-based Global Warming Policy Foundation, Professor Emeritus Richard Lindzen, formerly of MIT, said: " None of the proposed policies will have much impact on greenhouse gases. Thus we will continue to benefit from the one thing that can be clearly attributed to elevated carbon dioxide: namely, its effective role as a plant fertilizer, and reducer of the drought vulnerability of plants. Meanwhile, the IPCC is claiming that we need to prevent another 0.5◦C of warming, although the 1◦C that has occurred so far has been accompanied by the greatest increase in human welfare in history."
Interesting comment by Melanie Phillips in The Times (London): Link to Melanie
Lindzen tells Daily Mail global warming ended 20 years ago Link to Mail