Why is there so much preoccupation with atmospheric CO2 concentrations and reducing anthropogenic CO2 emissions when it is well documented in the peer-reviewed scientific literature that the CO2 contribution to the overall greenhouse effect is so weak that it can be easily supplanted by small changes in clouds and water vapor, or natural climate-changing constituents?

http://notrickszone.com/2016/09/19/new-paper-documents-imperceptible-co2-influence-on-the-greenhouse-effect-since-1992/

Monday, 23 May 2011

Back to work here soon

There has been quite a gap in posting here, and as one commenter noted, that makes a blog a less interesting place to visit!  I cannot see managing daily posts myself, but I have some ideas to encourage others to take part here and will post these shortly.

My reflection on this blog's value so far, is that the main beneficiary has been me - it has been a lively way to get back into climate politics and science.  From the comments on the last post, and also from a few emails prompted by it, I know that at least some people have found value in exactly the ways I hope for this blog:

        # help them protect their own children from the worst of the Climate Alarm Industry's excesses, by getting some early warning of them
       # keeping an eye on policies and curricula in this area (and I hope the blog will also help those actively campaigning for reform or removal of some of them)
       # as a source of useful information, and reference



I think the topic of climate-alarm-based propaganda in schools, which may be increasingly disguised by talk of 'sustainability' - the AGW foundation being treated as a given - is too important to walk away from.  This blog does not have a large readership, but it does appear quite prominently in some Google or other searches on relevant topics and so I always have hope of some happy happenstance encounter by someone who can make good use of the content here. 

Thank you to all those who commented, or emailed me.  Your remarks are very encouraging, and I will be carrying on with the blog.

5 comments:

  1. I think this article is right up your street. A drop of common sense, at last.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2011/jun/12/climate-change-curriculum-government-adviser

    ReplyDelete
  2. I agree. This is a remarkable development, and I hope a great deal of good will come from it. I will keep it on file and probably use it my next but one post. Many thanks for drawing my attention to it!

    ReplyDelete
  3. I don't usually comment on blogs unless I think I have something to contribute. However, a word of encouragement rarely goes amiss. Keep it up - I think a good balanced education is a fundamental right. I too was encouraged by the announcement about "climate change" being excluded from the curriculum. I suspect the way it has been taught gave some kids nightmares.

    I have no problem with kids being taught the basic science of climate, but NOT the scary scenarios and predictions.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Thank you very much for this encouragement, MostlyHarmless. Much appreciated. I am in a swirl of other things at the moment, and only managing to snipe occasionally rather than do much more on climate, but I am working on getting more time.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Strange that I commented "I have no problem with kids being taught the basic science of climate, but NOT the scary scenarios and predictions." just a couple of days ago. Just caught this on Tom Nelson's blog:

    "Australian children are being terrified by climate change lessons"

    http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/australian-kids-are-living-in-climate-of-fear/story-e6freon6-1226091162425

    ReplyDelete