This not a joke. Anthony Watts reports on his blog WUWT: "According to her mother Malena Ernman (48), 16-year-old Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg can see CO2 with the naked eye. She writes that in the book ‘Scenes from the heart. Our life for the climate’, which she wrote with her family."
On April 1, 2019, the American Journal of Climate Change rejected a paper by physicist Dr Ed Berry for the following reason: "The conclusion of this paper is completely opposite to the consensus of the academic community." Dr Berry comments: "Yes, it is. But the journal did not forward any evidence that there is an error in my paper and did not acknowledge that my paper proves the 'consensus' is wrong. So, if it is unacceptable to publish a paper that contradicts the 'consensus' how can there be progress in science?" Read the paper here, and judge for yourself:
U.S. meteorologist Chuck Wiese has immediately supported the accuracy of Dr Berry's paper: Download ChuckWiese.pdf
U.S. atmospherics physicist, Dr Ed Berry writes: "Get over it. You are not causing global warming. Those who tell you otherwise are lying to you. Here is new, powerful evidence that the climate alarmists are wrong. They flunk science. They have caused the greatest scam in human history. The United Nations IPCC is the “scientific” base for all climate alarmism."
Our Coalition’s energy spokesman, Bryan Leyland, has a guest post today in New Zealand’s most widely read blog, "Whale Oil Beef Hooked" setting out issues with the Royal Society of New Zealand in relation to departures from its Code of Ethics.
Professor Judith Curry, former head of the climatology department at Georgia Institute of Technology, gives the example of claims linking recent wildfires in the US to climate change. These are counterproductive, she says, because they deflect attention from the real causes of the problem, particularly management policies for state- and federal-owned forests. According to Professor Curry, these have been far more vulnerable to fires than privately-owned lands. Similarly, hurricane activity is frequently linked to global warming. However, with little evidence of any worsening trend and with large natural variability, Professor Curry says there are no sound climate-change-based arguments for effective policy responses.
Distinguished U.S. analyst Dr David Wojick posts vat CFACT: "If you look carefully it turns out that the apocalyptic Climate Emergency narrative is an empty shell. Just what the looming catastrophe looks like is never explained. As the saying goes, there is no there, there. But there is a good reason for this carefully crafted silence, namely there is no plausible scenario whereby global catastrophe comes from global warming."
This edited transcript on EIIR of an interview with Professor Larry Bell about Rupert Darwall's book, "Green Tyranny" is chock full of facts and figures that rebut alarmist claims about 'climate'change' and "renewable' energy.
This new volume by the Non-Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), "Climate Change Reconsidered II: Fossil Fuels", assesses the costs and benefits of the use of fossil fuels with a special focus on concerns related to anthropogenic climate change. The NIPCC authors conclude, “The global war on energy freedom, which commenced in earnest in the 1980s and reached a fever pitch in the second decade of the twenty-first century, was never founded on sound science or economics. The world’s policymakers ought to acknowledge this truth and end that war.”
"World temperatures show no trend when they exclude stations with data contaminated by being in increasingly in built-up areas or close to the sea and without the "corrections: ingtrodiced by IPCC scientists," writes Alan Moran for Australia's Institute of Public Affairs (IPA).
U.S. analyst David Wojick writes: "Many skeptics have written about the Australian bush fires, but science writer and blogger Jo Nova has done something truly remarkable. She has done a running in-depth analysis of both fires and the absurd climate claims made by the alarmists. With 15 fact filled blog posts to date and more coming, hers is a real time documentary of how the alarmists turn natural tragedy into breathless absurdity. I have seen nothing approaching it in terms of the depth of analysis."
WHAT LEGENDARY POETS WROTE ABOUT AUSSIE BUSHFIRES (Did legendary Australian poet Henry Lawson call his country's bushfires climate change? He most certainly did not. It’s nothing more than Mother Nature at her fiery worst. Tragic as it may well be, it’s happened before & it will happen again. It’s just a question of how they live with and manage the Australian bush. Fail to ‘back burn’ during the cooler, less windy months, the fuel load will surely grow & sooner or later, due to either man or lightning strike, it will surely burn, often with dire consequences for those who choose to build & live nearby.
Toward the end oi a longer poem in 1886, Banjo Paterson wrote about bushfires:
Coalition member Bryan Leyland adds his comment about historical origins of Australian bushfires:
And Christie, a contributor to the New Zealand blog "TheBFD" adds pertinent comments:
In Australia, Graham Williamson has rebutted in convincing detail claims of a university professor that the bushfires are caused by "climate change":
In America, Dr Roy Spencer, of the University of Alabama, pioneer of accurate satellite global temperaure observation and recording has rebutted claims by the Australian Bureau of Meteorology that 2019 is the country's warmest year on record:
Blog: Aussie firefighters say "Don't blame climate change":
UP-DATED 10 JANUARY: Jo Nova reminds us that "Black Friday in 1939 was an Australian bushfire disaster:
Australian analyst Tony Thomas posts at 'Quadrant': There’s a top-level oceanographer and meteorologist who is prepared to cry 'Nonsense!'on the 'global warming crisis' evident to climate modellers but not in the real world. He’s as well or better qualified than the modellers he criticises — the ones whose Year 2100 forebodings of 4degC warming have set the world to spending $US1.5 trillion a year to combat CO2 emissions. The iconoclast is Dr. Mototaka Nakamura."
Robert Lyman writes for Friends of Science Calgary: "There are four ways in which actual global trends are diverging more and more from the predictions upon which climate activists base their claims of impending catastrophe and allegedly 'inevitable decarbonization' of the world economy. After almost thirty years of measurement, the gentle rise in average global temperatures is near the bottom of the range projected by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). If, as many now expect, the world enters a cooling trend over the next few decades, average temperatures will fall entirely outside that range, and demonstrate conclusively that the IPCC models do not provide a reliable foundation for climate policy."
In a detailed review of science for the Global Warming Policy Foundation, Dr Christy summarised with three main points:
"1. Theoretical climate modelling is deficient for describing past variations...They’ve failed hypothesis tests and that means they’re highly questionable.
"2. The weather we really care about isn’t changing, and Mother Nature has many ways on her own to cause her climate to experience considerable variations in cycles. "3. Carbon is the world’s dominant source of energy today, because it is affordable and directly leads to poverty eradication as well as the lengthening and quality enhancement of human life.
Dr Jay Lehr and Tom Harris post at principia-scientific.org: "When we started our careers, it was considered an honor to be a member of professional societies that helped practitioners keep up with the latest developments in their fields through relevant meetings and publications. Senior author Dr....
Vijay Jayaraj posts at Cornwall Alliance about how climate alarmists refuse to recognise, let alone acknowledge, how much world supplies oif food have increased in recent years as a result of increases in Earth's atmosphere of the trace gas carbon dioxide.
Our earlier posting of links to Dr John McLean's exposure of errors in the HadCrut temperature data relied on by the IPCC for its (mostly misleading) predictions, reminded us of the 2009 paper by Joseph D'Aleo and Anthony Watts that analysed the siting of temperature recording stations. That paper is worth reading again in 2018 as IPCC makes more scary predictions, continuing its line of alarmist forecasts which have still not come to pass.
Paul Homewood writes at blog "Not A Lot People Know That" how global temperatures have returned to levels of 2002. Also scroll down to the interesting comments which follow, especially this one: "Never have so many been conned by so few for so much."
Britain’s plans to decarbonise the economy have not been properly thought through, and there is a dangerous lack of systems and project engineering input. That’s according to Michael Kelly, emeritus professor of technology in the Department of Engineering at the University of Cambridge, who says that replacing fossil fuels with electricity from renewables is impractical on the timescale of 2050.“It’s clear that there has been little or no systems engineering input into the plans. How can we possibly proceed further along the renewables path when we lack any technology to store electricity at scale? How can we hope to electrify transport when we would need to consume the whole global annual supply of several important minerals to do so, just for the UK?” And Professor Kelly warns that the costs of decarbonising will be ruinous of our current standards of living.
U.S. climate analyst Dr David Wojick posts at CFact: "The brutal cold wave that just struck America provides a stark example of why 100% renewables cannot possibly work. Once the massive high pressure system was in place there was almost no wind, so no significant wind power. And the coldest temperatures by far were at night or early morning, when there was no solar power either."