Professor Michael Kelly, emeritus Professor of Technology at Cambridge University, was one of 43 Fellows of the Royal Society in UK who in 2016 accused the RS of being dogmatic on the topic of climate change. Dr Kelly wrote about the challenge in the Mail on Sunday, and his article is relevant two years later in New Zealand in view of the complaint by members of the New Zealand Climate Science Coalition against the Royal Society of New Zealand alleging misleading statements in this country about causes of changes in climate.
[Link to pdf](Kelly on RS.pdf)
U.S. analyst Dr Ed Berry writes: "We have already won the science debate, but few people understand this. The alarmists have no scientific case. Now we must win the political debate....Our task is great. We must show the public why human CO2 does not change the climate. Our goal is to get climate change out of politics and back into science. The idea that we have a 'climate emergency' is a product of a crippled mind."
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."
"Seriously, folks, we’re supposed to be seeing all kinds of bad stuff. But none of it has happened. No cities gone underwater. No increase in heat waves or cold waves. No islands sinking into the ocean. No increase in hurricanes. No millions of climate refugees. The tragedies being pushed by the failed serial doomcasters for the last 30 years simply haven’t come to pass." Willis Eschenbach posts at WUWT.
In this post, Anthony Watts of the highly regarded blog WattsUpWithThat shows seven charts relating to climate behaviour in the United States during the decade recently concluded, that expose the fallacies propagated by the catastrophycisists who preach "dangerous global warming".
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.
"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).
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.”
Agrobiologist and scientific researcher Dr. Albrecht Glatzle, author of over 100 scientific papers and two textbooks, posts at WattsUpWithThat: “Our key conclusion is there is no need for anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs), and even less so for livestock-born emissions, to explain climate change. Climate has always been changing, and even the present warming is most likely driven by natural factors. The warming potential of anthropogenic GHG emissions has been exaggerated, and the beneficial impacts of manmade CO2 emissions for nature, agriculture, and global food security have been systematically suppressed, ignored, or at least downplayed by the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) and other UN (United Nations) agencies."
But, this should be read with the Allison-Sheahen paper (see link below). The WUWT article argues that the amount of methane emitted by animals is greatly overstated by the IPCC, and there isn't very much methane.The Allison-Sheahen paper explains that no matter how many animals there are (or how much methane), the realities of the infrared spectrum and the way competing molecules (especially H2O) absorb photons makes CH4 (methane) completely irrelevant.
In the annual Global Warming Policy Foundation lecture in London, expatriate New Zealander, Professor Michael J Kelly, of Cambridge University said, inter alia: "The global climate models seem to show heating at least twice as fast as the observed data over the last three decades. I am unconvinced that climate change represents a proximate catastrophe, and I suggest that a mega-volcano in Iceland that takes out European airspace for six months would eclipse the climate concerns in short order....Much of what is proposed by way of climate change mitigation is simply pie-in-the-sky.... The main message is that our present energy infrastructure is vast and has evolved over 200 years. So the chances of revolutionising it in short order on the scale envisaged by the net-zero target of Parliament is pretty close to zero; zero being exactly the chance of the meeting Extinction Rebellion’s demands."
Viscount Monckton of Brenchley has sent a strongly-worded message to the Pope and the Archbishop of Canterbury: "In this message for the New Year, I invite both of you to make a new resolution: 'I will no longer curry favour with the global governing elite by spouting fashionably fatuous, scientifically spurious, preposterously pietistic platitudes about the imagined – and imaginary – threat of global warming. Instead I will do what the Lord of Life did. I will speak up for the 1.2 billion people worldwide who are poor, and who will be condemned to remain poor because they are denied access to electrical power. I will demand that coal-fired power stations be built at once, for coal is plentiful and provides the cheapest and most reliable energy supply.'
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."
Professor Ross McKitrick, of the University of Guelph, Canada, writes at WattsUpWithThat: "Climate and energy policy has fallen into the hands of a worldwide movement that openly declares its extremism. The would-be moderates on this issue have pretended for 20 years they could keep the status quo without having to fight for it. Those days are over."
Vijay Jayaraj writes at Cornwallis Alliance: "Real climate-change deniers should be called out. They are as dangerous as climate-change alarmists, who impede scientific advancement and lead the masses into believing extreme theories using scare tactics. Both climate-change deniers and climate-change alarmists are wrong on their claims about the implications of this [Northern Hemisphere] winter and how they interpret the behaviour of the earth's climatic system over the past 2000 years. Here are four reasons why:"
Alexander C. R. Hammond posts at humanprogress.org: "The world’s richest regions, such as North America and Europe, are not only increasing their forest area. They have more forests than they did prior to industrialization. The United Kingdom, for example, has more than tripled its forest area since 1919. The UK will soon reach forest levels equal to those registered in the Domesday Book, almost a thousand years ago."
The Cornwall Alliance posts: "Have mathematical models replaced good old-fashioned scientific testing? An understanding of the big picture in a field of study helps to frame and give essential perspective to that field. Take the field of natural science for instance. A big-picture look at the overall operation of the natural science profession has traditionally been seen in the “scientific method,” which consists of observation, hypothesis and testing. Rigorous testing of a hypothesis eventually leads to a “theory.”... Of late, mathematical modeling, an essential investigative tool, appears to have taken over the world of natural science. And with the ascension of modeling, the focus in scientific endeavors — particularly in the practice of atmospheric science — may have shifted away from the rigour of testing to verify a hypothesis and toward constructing a model to represent a theory."
In a blistering letter to the Chief Science Adviser to the New Zealander Prime Minister, a leading fraud investigator, John Rofe, has accused the PM and her Minister for Climate Change of fraud in what they have been telling New Zealanders about climate change and its causes.
Who cares about pesky facts? The ABC has a hysterical narrative to peddle. "Climate change is the single biggest challenge ever faced by humanity. We have absolutely no time to lose." If you believe that, you’ll probably believe that the ABC’s “Fact Checking Unit” actually checks facts. This post, from New Zealand blog TheBFD, about the Australian Broadcasting Commission (ABC) is an example of the biased alarmism practised by news media through the world, in spite of the complete absence of any convincing evidence that we are in a "climate emergency".
Chris Kenny in "The Australian" with the truth about bush fires in his country: "Like a struck match in the bush, global warming is the spark that triggers a destructive firestorm in public debate. Heated on emotion, fanned by sensationalist media and fuelled by ideology, it burns through common sense, reason and decency, showing no respect for facts or rational thought. Climate alarmists are using tragic deaths and community pain to push a political barrow."