The disgraceful panic over rising CO2 levels has led to many harms, not least to the mental well-being of children, and the physical well-being of just about everyone. The jejune 'Earth Hour' is but one manifestation of the rot that has spread into many groups, organisations, and even governments.
Celebrate 'Human Achievement Hour' instead: https://cei.org/humanachievementhour
Or, how about 'Energy Hour': https://climatelessons.blogspot.co.uk/2012/03/earth-hour-is-phoney-energy-hour-is.html
And the 'must-read': https://climatelessons.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/i-abhor-earth-hour-abundant-cheap.html
Note added 24 March. Jo Nova calls for 'Power Hour': http://joannenova.com.au/2018/03/fight-the-forces-of-darkness-celebrate-powerhour-tonight/
'It’s your chance to show your commitment to fighting the forces of darkness.'
Note added 25 March. Mark Morano's site provides more links to sensible responses to the 'Earth Hour' lunacy: http://www.climatedepot.com/2018/03/24/star-treks-william-shatner-promotes-earth-hour-darkness-but-he-is-rebuked-by-forces-of-light/
Unfortunately, some misuse science. Some of their intentions, are far from benevolent. They see science as a mechanism for political power and control. There is great danger from those who would use science for political control over us.
How do they do this? They instill, and then continuously magnify, fear. Fear is the most effective instrument of totalitarian control.
Chet Richards, physicist,
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2021/03/science_in_an_age_of_fear.html
Friday 23 March 2018
Wednesday 21 February 2018
Inch by Inch, Row by Row, Make the Climate Rascals Go
Here's a slightly modified first verse of an even more heavily modified 'Garden Song' which I put together about 5 years ago:
Inch
by inch, row by row
Make the
climate rascals go
All it takes is to check, don'tcha know
For their claims are so unsound.
All it takes is to check, don'tcha know
For their claims are so unsound.
And here is a recent example on WUWT of what people can find when they check climate-alarm-campaigners' scare-stories about climate. There is surely great scope for including such examples in school textbooks as and when the climate alarm fad fades away and the whole sorry farce can be studied in ways to help children and adults recover from the propaganda onslaught they have endured.
'...
Climate Alarmist have over time gone from focusing on Global Warming,
to Climate Change to simply fear of Carbon. Thus, this research
sought to determine the credibility of Ten (10) very frequently cited
Climate Alarmists Claims.
Below
are Rebuttals to each of these ten typical climate alarmists’
claims. The
rebuttal authors are all recognized experts on their topic and each
rebuttal demonstrates the claim fallacy by merely citing the most
credible empirical data.
Claim
#1: Heat Waves are increasing at an alarming rate and heat kills
For
Rebuttal and Author Credentials See: EF_RRT_AC
– Heat Waves
Claim
#2: Global warming is causing more hurricanes and stronger hurricanes
For
Rebuttal and Author Credentials See: EF_RRT_AC
– Hurricanes
Claim
#3: Global warming is causing more and stronger tornadoes
For
Rebuttal and Author Credentials See: EF_RRT_CA
– Tornadoes
Claim
#4: Global warming is increasing the magnitude and frequency of
droughts and floods.
For
Rebuttal and Author Credentials See: EF_RRT_AC
– Droughts and Floods
Claim
#5: Global Warming has increased U.S. Wildfires
For
Rebuttal and Author Credentials See: EF_RRT_AC
– Wildfires
Claim
#6: Global warming is causing snow to disappear
For
Rebuttal and Author Credentials See: EF_RRT_CA
– Snow
Claim
#7: Global warming is resulting in rising sea levels as seen in both
tide gauge and satellite technology
For
Rebuttal and Author Credentials See: EF_RRT_CA
– Sea Level
Claim
#8: Arctic, Antarctic and Greenland ice loss is accelerating
due to global warming
For
Rebuttal and Author Credentials See: EF_RRT_AC
– Arctic, Antarctic, Greenland
Claim #9: Rising atmospheric
CO2 concentrations
are causing ocean acidification, which is catastrophically harming
marine life
For
Rebuttal and Author Credentials See: EF_RRT_CA
– Ocean pH
Claim
#10: Carbon pollution is a health hazard
For
Rebuttal and Author Credentials See: EF_RRT_AC
– Health'
More
from the WUWT
article:
'On
February 9, 2018, The Concerned Household Electricity Consumers
Council (CHECC) submitted a fifth Supplement to their Petition to
provide additional new highly relevant and credible information.
(See:EF
CPP Fifth Supplement to Petition for Recon FINAL020918 )
It relates to variables other than temperature describing the Earth’s
Climate System. '
Monday 19 February 2018
Clearing up the Mess produced by Climate Alarmism: watch out for Nolans and Baizuos.
The damage done to children and other vulnerable groups by the climate alarmists has yet to be quantified and assessed, but seems likely to be deep and extensive. Here is one recent example: young women, whose entire education could have been contaminated with climate alarmism, are agonising over whether or not to have children: http://wgntv.com/2018/01/31/climate-change-is-impacting-some-womens-decisions-to-have-children/
This blog will continue to report on people and materials that can help those who wish to repair such damage over the coming decades.
Here are a couple of types of people who will get in the way of such efforts: nolans and baizuos.
This blog will continue to report on people and materials that can help those who wish to repair such damage over the coming decades.
Here are a couple of types of people who will get in the way of such efforts: nolans and baizuos.
NOLAN /di’khe’d/ A bigoted blowhard, someone unwilling to listen to other points of view, someone who thinks they have licence to cast moral judgement upon others, someone who makes a show of being independently minded, intellectually rigorous and scrupulously impartial but is in fact someone who toes the party line and is in reality no more than a PC ‘bot’ churning out the Liberal Establishment orthodoxy whilst suppressing inconvenient facts. Alternate /J.O’Brien/
Hat-tip: Biased-BBC, https://biasedbbc.org/blog/2018/02/19/start-the-week-open-thread-161/
BAIZUO. 'The
word 'baizuo'
is,
according to political scientist Zhang Chenchen, a Chinese word that
ridicules Western “liberal elites”. He further defined the word
“baizuo” with the definition “People who only care about topics
such as immigration, minorities, LGBT and the environment” and
“have no sense of real problems in the real world”; they are
hypocritical humanitarians who advocate for peace and equality only
to “satisfy their own feeling of moral superiority”; they are
“obsessed with political correctness” to the extent that they
“tolerate backwards Islamic values for the sake of
multiculturalism”; they believe in the welfare state that “benefits
only the idle and the free riders”; they are the “ignorant and
arrogant westerners” who “pity the rest of the world and think
they are saviours”. The term has also been used to refer to
perceived double standards of the Western media, such as the alleged
bias on reporting about Islamist attacks in Xinjiang. The
use of the word “Baizuo” could be an insult on the Chinese
Internet.'
'Baizuo' is apparently
pronounced 'buy-tshwaah'
Hat-tip: Samizdata, https://www.samizdata.net/2018/02/samizdata-er-chinese-word-of-the-day-baizuo/
Monday 8 January 2018
Repairing the Damage to Children Caused by Climate Alarmists: letters from Ross McKitrick and Richard Lindzen
It seems the high school students mentioned in the previous post sent their 5 questions to other distinguished climate authorities, not least to Ross McKitrick and to Richard Lindzen. Both have made their replies public. Here is the one from McKitrick:
Five questions from students about climate change
Ross McKitrick January 2018
'In late 2017 I was contacted by a group of students at a high school in Europe asking if I would answer some questions on climate change for a project they were working on. Here are the questions they asked, and the answers I gave them.
1. What is behind global warming? Over the last 150 years there have been influences due to strengthening solar output, land-use changes, increased greenhouse gases and natural variability, among other things. The dominant school of thought in climatology is that rising greenhouse gas levels explain most of the overall warming trend since the 1950s. There are good reasons to support this, although the climate system is too complex to assume the matter is settled. The mechanisms by which the sun affects the climate are not well understood, nor are the mechanisms behind clouds, ocean-atmosphere interactions and other basic processes. The relative lack of warming in the tropical troposphere and over the South Pole are not easily explained under the theory that greenhouse gas levels dominate the climate system.
2. What can we do to prevent global warming? If it is a natural process, nothing. If it is mainly due to rising greenhouse gas levels we need to ask instead whether we would want to prevent it. It would require complete cessation of fossil fuel use, which would cause intolerable economic and social costs and would only yield small changes in the time path of global warming for the next century or more. Even large-scale emission reductions (such as under the Paris and Kyoto treaties) would only cause a small slowdown in the accumulation of CO2 in the atmosphere by 2100, so any benefits from such policies are likewise tiny, yet the costs would be enormous. The small warming that took place since the early 20th century was largely beneficial, and the astonishing social and economic benefits associated with cheap fossil energy far outweighed any problems it might have created. It is likely that this will be true over the next century as well.
3. If we don't do anything about it, how does it affect us and our descendants? Humans flourish in every climate on earth from the tropics to the polar regions. We are very adaptable. The only issue is whether changes take place so quickly that we cannot adapt, but history shows this to be a rare situation. Climate processes are slow, and if the climate models are correct, the changes are gradual and predictable. People can adapt to warming conditions more easily than to cooling conditions. The IPCC predicted that over the next hundred years, changes in economies and technology will have a much larger effect on peoples' lives than changes in climate.
4. What will happen in the future, and what are the alternatives for us, if the Earth becomes unlivable? There is no chance that greenhouse gases will make the Earth unlivable. If an asteroid hits, or another ice age begins, or something like that, then we face catastrophe. But the question essentially asks, what happens if we all die? The answer is, we all die.
5. How can we save Earth if it isn't too late? To ask the question is to reveal that you greatly overestimate your size in relation to the Earth. We could not ruin the Earth even if we tried, nor could we save it if it faced ruin. Our planet is a remarkably adaptable and robust home. We don't live in a giant china shop where everything is fragile and breakable, it's more like a playground where everything is made to withstand considerable wear and tear. Over the Earth's history the amount of CO2 in the air has typically been 2-10 times higher than at present yet the plants, animals and oceans flourished. Much of the past half million years have been ice age conditions which wiped out life on the northern continents, yet it always came back as soon as the ice retreated. If you take the view that the ordinary human pursuit of prosperity and happiness will somehow destroy the planet you will end up adopting an anti-human outlook. This is both a scientific and an ethical error. Set your sights on a more modest scale, by trying to be a good citizen and be helpful to the people around you, and you will make much better decisions than if you are thinking in terms of faraway abstract categories like saving the Earth.
Good luck with your studies.'
Downloadable from here: https://www.rossmckitrick.com/uploads/4/8/0/8/4808045/5questions.pdf
Unfortunately, the Lindzen reply is behind a paywall, here:
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12129-017-9669-x
Hat-tip for both to SEPP: http://www.sepp.org/twtwfiles/2018/TWTW%201-6-18.pdf
Five questions from students about climate change
Ross McKitrick January 2018
'In late 2017 I was contacted by a group of students at a high school in Europe asking if I would answer some questions on climate change for a project they were working on. Here are the questions they asked, and the answers I gave them.
1. What is behind global warming? Over the last 150 years there have been influences due to strengthening solar output, land-use changes, increased greenhouse gases and natural variability, among other things. The dominant school of thought in climatology is that rising greenhouse gas levels explain most of the overall warming trend since the 1950s. There are good reasons to support this, although the climate system is too complex to assume the matter is settled. The mechanisms by which the sun affects the climate are not well understood, nor are the mechanisms behind clouds, ocean-atmosphere interactions and other basic processes. The relative lack of warming in the tropical troposphere and over the South Pole are not easily explained under the theory that greenhouse gas levels dominate the climate system.
2. What can we do to prevent global warming? If it is a natural process, nothing. If it is mainly due to rising greenhouse gas levels we need to ask instead whether we would want to prevent it. It would require complete cessation of fossil fuel use, which would cause intolerable economic and social costs and would only yield small changes in the time path of global warming for the next century or more. Even large-scale emission reductions (such as under the Paris and Kyoto treaties) would only cause a small slowdown in the accumulation of CO2 in the atmosphere by 2100, so any benefits from such policies are likewise tiny, yet the costs would be enormous. The small warming that took place since the early 20th century was largely beneficial, and the astonishing social and economic benefits associated with cheap fossil energy far outweighed any problems it might have created. It is likely that this will be true over the next century as well.
3. If we don't do anything about it, how does it affect us and our descendants? Humans flourish in every climate on earth from the tropics to the polar regions. We are very adaptable. The only issue is whether changes take place so quickly that we cannot adapt, but history shows this to be a rare situation. Climate processes are slow, and if the climate models are correct, the changes are gradual and predictable. People can adapt to warming conditions more easily than to cooling conditions. The IPCC predicted that over the next hundred years, changes in economies and technology will have a much larger effect on peoples' lives than changes in climate.
4. What will happen in the future, and what are the alternatives for us, if the Earth becomes unlivable? There is no chance that greenhouse gases will make the Earth unlivable. If an asteroid hits, or another ice age begins, or something like that, then we face catastrophe. But the question essentially asks, what happens if we all die? The answer is, we all die.
5. How can we save Earth if it isn't too late? To ask the question is to reveal that you greatly overestimate your size in relation to the Earth. We could not ruin the Earth even if we tried, nor could we save it if it faced ruin. Our planet is a remarkably adaptable and robust home. We don't live in a giant china shop where everything is fragile and breakable, it's more like a playground where everything is made to withstand considerable wear and tear. Over the Earth's history the amount of CO2 in the air has typically been 2-10 times higher than at present yet the plants, animals and oceans flourished. Much of the past half million years have been ice age conditions which wiped out life on the northern continents, yet it always came back as soon as the ice retreated. If you take the view that the ordinary human pursuit of prosperity and happiness will somehow destroy the planet you will end up adopting an anti-human outlook. This is both a scientific and an ethical error. Set your sights on a more modest scale, by trying to be a good citizen and be helpful to the people around you, and you will make much better decisions than if you are thinking in terms of faraway abstract categories like saving the Earth.
Good luck with your studies.'
Downloadable from here: https://www.rossmckitrick.com/uploads/4/8/0/8/4808045/5questions.pdf
Unfortunately, the Lindzen reply is behind a paywall, here:
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12129-017-9669-x
Hat-tip for both to SEPP: http://www.sepp.org/twtwfiles/2018/TWTW%201-6-18.pdf
Wednesday 27 December 2017
Repairing the Damage to Children Caused by Climate Alarmists: a letter from Ken Haapala
Anyone on the look-out for materials, ideas, approaches that could help repair the emotional and intellectual damage caused to children (and vulnerable adults) by climate alarmists? This letter from Ken Haapala of SEPP seems to me to be a good contribution in the right direction:
Source: [dead link: http://sable.madmimi.com/c/16467?id=468806.21087.1.702e167e90d3764e59f9302489c6a55f]
We are starting a
project next week and the topic is "change". We have chosen
the subtopic "global warming"
Do you have the time to
answer a few questions in writing?
1. What is behind
global warming?
2. What can we do to
prevent global warming?
3. If we don't do
anything about it, how does it affect us and our descendants?
4. What will happen in
the future, and what are the alternatives for us, if the Earth
becomes unlivable?
5. How can we save
Earth if it isn't too late?
RESPONSE
Dear Students:
Dr. Singer was not
available to answer your questions. I have worked with him for the
past seven years, and he approved this response to you.
You ask some very good
questions, which require answers with some detail. Science advances
by asking good questions, providing answers that may or may not be
correct (guesses), then testing the guesses against all hard
evidence, that may or may not support it. If the strongest evidence
does not support the guess (the hypothesis), then the guess must be
discarded or changed.
The climate has been
warming and cooling for hundreds of millions of years. For over two
million years, the globe has usually been cold, with long ice ages
interrupted by short warm periods of 10 to 15 thousand years. We live
in one such warm period of about 10,000 years. The longer periods of
cooling (and shorter periods of warming) have been explained as
resulting from a changing of the orbit and tilt of the globe in
relation to the sun, known as the Milankovitch cycles.
Within the
generally-warm past 10,000 years, there has been shorter periods of
modest warming and cooling. During a warming period, agriculture
began and with it, civilization. The most recent cooling period is
known as the Little Ice Age. It occurred between about 1300 to 1850
and was very hard for those living in Northern Europe and China,
where we have written records. In Europe, many died from starvation
and associated diseases because crops did not ripen. The Nordic
settlements in Greenland were wiped out. Great storms occurred in the
North Sea, killing thousands of people living in the low countries.
It is thought this cooling period was caused by a weaker intensity of
the sun, which resulted in increasing cloudiness and corresponding
cooling.
Understanding what is
behind the current warming of the last century or so, requires a
complete understanding of what created periods of warming and cooling
over the past 10,000 years, which we do not have. The earth’s
climate is extremely complex. It can be described as the result of
two fluids in motion interacting with the land. The fluids move in
response to the heat generated daily by the sun.
One of the fluids is
the ocean, which transports heat on the surface from the tropics to
the poles, where it escapes into the atmosphere and to space. A
famous surface ocean flow is the Gulf Stream, which keeps Northern
Europe much warmer than the corresponding latitudes of Canada. The
other fluid is the atmosphere, which transports heat from the surface
to the upper troposphere by convection, from which heat can escape to
space by radiation. We simply do not understand the movements of
fluids sufficiently well to explain exactly how these systems work.
Adding to the
complexity is the rotation of the earth, which changes the intensity
of solar energy hitting any specific location on the globe. That
varies both daily and seasonally, which adds to the ever-changing
motions of the atmosphere and the oceans. It may take hundreds of
years before these complex motions are fully understood.
In answer to your
question: What is behind global warming? We simply do not know in
detail, but can guess, then look at the evidence.
Over 100 years ago,
scientists wondered why the surface of the earth does not cool as
rapidly at night, as many thought it should. An explanation, since
then well tested, is that some gases in the atmosphere delay the
transport of heat from the surface to space, keeping the earth warmer
at night. These gases are called greenhouse gases, the most important
of which is water vapor. Deserts, with low atmospheric water vapor,
cool more rapidly at night than humid areas at comparable latitude.
A lesser greenhouse gas
is carbon dioxide which humans emit by burning fossil fuels. But
research by different laboratories have shown that adding carbon
dioxide to today’s atmosphere will cause only a small warming,
nothing to fear.
Prior to the time when
satellite measurements began (1979), the surface thermometers that
indicated warming were largely on land, mostly located in the US,
Western Europe, and other Westernized areas. The coverage was not
global. Surface temperatures may indicate what is occurring in the
atmosphere, but are influenced by many other human activities such as
building cities, land clearing, and farming. For over 38 years, we
have had the benefit of accurate temperature measurements from
satellites that cover nearly all the earth, including oceans.
Meanwhile, computer
models, known as General Circulation Models, have been used with
relatively little success. Built into them is the assumption that the
slight warming caused by CO2 will be amplified into a much greater
warming due to water vapor. The principles of the scientific method
demand that real data from observations be used, and for a computer
model to be valid, it must reproduce the observed data. Any warming
caused by increased greenhouse gases will be stronger in the
atmosphere than on the surface.
Satellite measurements
of temperature trends in the atmosphere have been studied intensely,
including even tiny corrections for drifting orbits. Furthermore, the
temperature trends are double-checked by using four different sets of
atmospheric temperature measurements, taken with different
instruments, carried by weather balloons; and all closely agree. Now
stretching over 38 years, these show a modest warming trend.
From this evidence, we
can conclude that: unless compelling evidence indicates otherwise,
the warming influence of greenhouse gases, especially carbon dioxide,
has been greatly overestimated; efforts to reduce greenhouse gases
will not prevent global warming; carbon dioxide-caused warming will
be modest; and the Earth will not become unlivable from carbon
dioxide warming. Life began on this planet when the atmosphere was
far richer in carbon dioxide, and far poorer in oxygen, than it is
today.
Starting in 1972, Landsat satellites have been taking images of the
earth. They show that the earth is greening with increasing carbon
dioxide, becoming richer for life. Thousands of experiments show food
crops grow better in atmospheres richer in carbon dioxide than the
atmosphere today. Indoor plant nurseries routinely increase the
carbon dioxide concentration of their air to three to four times that
of today’s atmosphere.
Through the wonder of
photosynthesis, using energy from the sun, green plants convert
carbon dioxide and water into oxygen and carbohydrates (food). All
plants and complex animals depend on this food. We should praise
carbon dioxide, not fear it.
To directly answer your
questions:
- What can we do to prevent global warming? Nothing. The main cause is natural variation, which we cannot prevent.
- If we don't do anything about it, how does it affect us and our descendants? You and your descendants will live in a world richer in carbon dioxide, which is a benefit to plants, the environment, and humanity.
- What will happen in the future, and what are the alternatives for us, if the Earth becomes unlivable? Life began on earth with the atmosphere many times richer in carbon dioxide than today. The earth will not become unlivable from carbon dioxide-caused warming.
- How can we save Earth if it isn't too late? The earth does not need saving, but it needs good stewards. You can help by not polluting with trash, not wasting energy, and living healthy lives.
Best wishes,
Kenneth Haapala,
President
Science and
Environmental Policy Project
December 22, 2017'
Source: [dead link: http://sable.madmimi.com/c/16467?id=468806.21087.1.702e167e90d3764e59f9302489c6a55f]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)