Published in the Financial Post today:
OPEN CLIMATE LETTER TO UN SECRETARY GENERAL: Current scientific knowledge does not substantiate Ban Ki-Moon assertions on weather and climate, say 125 scientists.
Open Letter to the Secretary-General of the United Nations
H.E. Ban Ki-Moon, Secretary-General, United Nations
First Avenue and East 44th Street, New York, New York, U.S.A.
November 29, 2012
Mr. Secretary-General:
On November 9 this year you told the General Assembly: “Extreme weather due to climate change is the new normal … Our challenge remains, clear and urgent: to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, to strengthen adaptation to … even larger climate shocks … and to reach a legally binding climate agreement by 2015 … This should be one of the main lessons of Hurricane Sandy.”
On November 13 you said at Yale: “The science is clear; we should waste no more time on that debate.”
The following day, in Al Gore’s “Dirty Weather” Webcast, you spoke of “more severe storms, harsher droughts, greater floods”, concluding: “Two weeks ago, Hurricane Sandy struck the eastern seaboard of the United States. A nation saw the reality of climate change. The recovery will cost tens of billions of dollars. The cost of inaction will be even higher. We must reduce our dependence on carbon emissions.”
We the undersigned, qualified in climate-related matters, wish to state that current scientific knowledge does not substantiate your assertions.
Read the full letter and signatories here
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Phillip Bratby says:
November 29, 2012 at 11:12 pm
I eagerly await such report also, but I won’t see it, unless it is tucked away a’la Interstella Highway planning application for the destruction of Earth in The Hitchhikers’ Guide to the Galaxay, i.e. buried under heeps of paperwork!
Ban is a liar, a deciever, just part of the whole slime that is modern politics. They are not interested in the truth, accuracy of science, demonstrable oberservational emperical evidence, they only want that which they can use to chieve their objective, Socialist Control of the World & ALL its resources, for financial gain (they couldn’t possibly have achieved it without the Bankers et al, nor the Neo-Fuedalists who just want to retain their wealth & status quo), then proceed to execute the New World Order they have created, ration resources to who they see fit, enrich their slimey chums around the Third World, so that their peoples can be even more impoverished & deprived at the expense & enrichment of their friends & tribal buddies! They want revenge for creating wealth, happiness, freedom from tyranny (their of course), improvement of the mind, increased knowledge & understanding, all must be controlled under the NWO Godless Religeon! Depressing I know, but don’t expect a response just like a couple of years ago, the bastard didn’t bother then, why would he bother now, regardless of the order of magnitude increase in signatories to an excellent letter!
🙁 AtB
You’re walking down a dimly lit street and you’re aware there’s violence about and so naturally you’re uncertain about the next bloke you come across so WHACK!!
I was uncertain about him your Honour so I used the precautionary principle with great certainty.
And rightly so… case dismissed!
Well, a Canadian STARTED this CAGW fraud. Maurice Strong set up the WMO and then the IPCC.
“Bring down the capitalists” was his plan. I am now hoping another Canadian, Prime Minister Stephen Harper, will be influential in STOPPING this CAGW fraud.
I sent copies of the letter to the Prime Minister; the Energy Minister; the Environment Minister; the Finance Minister; my MP and a Senator.
Not that it will do any good. But every little bit may help.
BTW. I have numerous articles to these people over the last couple of years.
It is a noble effort, and addressing it to the UN Secretary-General is appropriate, if only for the reason that money from the developed nations is expected to fill the Green Climate Fund.
For example, 10% of PM Julia Gillard’s carbon tax goes to the UN.
Julie Bishop 3 minute mark, 30 sec.
I keep hearing claims of extreme weather on the rise but they never offer the mountains of evidence they paid for. On the other hand there is evidence to the contrary.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/reference-pages/climatic-phenomena-pages/extreme-weather-page/
From the letter:
I sometimes wonder who the real deniers are. After 16 years of continued upward rise in co2 global mean temp has been flat. Even IF temps started to fall Warmists would still insist that we must act now. Even 5 or 10 years of cooling and they would still cling onto “warming in the pipeline, we must act now”, while forgetting that (in the absence of major volcanic eruptions) the AGW theory, as it stands, would have been long falsified. Some say it already has at 15 years.
http://www1.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/cmb/bams-sotc/climate-assessment-2008-lo-rez.pdf
[14.88 MB]
Telling Moon the science doesn’t support his statements is an excercize in futility. Does anyone think he cares? These people will only be stopped by the likes of Chris Horner and the others, including Mr. FOI himself, who bring the rats into the light.
“The science is clear; we should waste no more time on that debate.”
In other words, pay no attention to the man behind the curtain, or who are you going to believe, me, or your lying eyes?
Thanks, Anthony, for helping bring attention to these brave scientists and what they have to say. Voices of reason.
The UN has this dream of world domination by unelected politicians.
Impressive list… but there are many well known skeptics that are missing… Lindzen, Christy, Spencer, McKitrick, McIntyre…
“Our times demand a new definition of leadership – global leadership. They demand a new constellation of international cooperation – governments, civil society and the private sector, working together for a collective global good.”
Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon
Speech at World Economic Forum
Davos, Switzerland (29 January 2009)
It is easy to forget that the UN actually does its work through a whole host of agencies under its umbrella: for example WTO, WHO, UNICEF, ITU. IMF. There is CONSIDERABLE power, influence and cash within the UN and it will attempt to extend its power influence and wealth via the excuse of controlling the global environment. It will do so without any direct influence from the people nor with any scrutiny from independent bodies with the power to take action against UN corruption.
Robert A. Taylor says:
November 29, 2012 at 10:03 pm
Thank you! I wanted to find it as well, but when I saw how long it was, I gave up.
So where are we now? With 15 years, we are 95% certain something is wrong. And according to Santer, if I have it right, at 17 years we are 100% certain something is wrong. And with RSS having 0 slope for 15 years and 10 months, we must be around 97% certain something is wrong.
James Ard says:
November 30, 2012 at 7:08 am
Telling Moon the science doesn’t support his statements is an excercize in futility. Does anyone think he cares? These people will only be stopped by the likes of Chris Horner and the others, including Mr. FOI himself, who bring the rats into the light.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
ClimateGate II didn’t even make it into the MSM. This did. That’s not shining light on the rats?
James Ard says:
November 30, 2012 at 7:08 am
Telling Moon the science doesn’t support his statements is an excercize in futility. Does anyone think he cares? These people will only be stopped by the likes of Chris Horner and the others, including Mr. FOI himself, who bring the rats into the light.
=========================================================================
If the expectation was that he’d listen, maybe it was an exercise in futility. But he’s not the only one who heard what they said. Some who heard might even start to pay attention.
Having been in this fight for well over a dozen years, I concluded some time ago that approaches like the one we just made to the UN S-G do not have a direct effect.
In fact no approaches of this sort make a direct impact by itself.
There are a number of participants in this fight:
UN world governance protagonists,
The Quisling scientists,
The media,
The politicians,
The public,
The immediate beneficiaries.
In this mix, the politicians listen only to what the polls say about the next election.
The media also gauges from which direction the wind is blowing and does not antagonize its readers and thereby its advertising revenue.
The public is not interested in science and becomes only slowly aware of the cost of it all to its collective pocketbook. That is where things are indeed slowly changing.
However, from the point of view of effective advocacy, the science, interesting as it is, is not going to win the day with the politicians who do indeed have the power to pull nations out of accords – as Canada did with Kyoto. Nor with the public.
To the average politician, scientific evidence is “just another opinion”. He seems to be impervious to your and my argument. Politics sets his course.
Letters like this one to Mr Ban serve a purpose, because they address public opinion.
Whether you like it or not, that’s where it has to start.
Many thanks for those who do know what they are talking about in this field for correcting Gen.Sec Bim-Bam-Boom’s ignorant comments.
Both this IPCC and UNFCCC (spot the UN in UNFCCC) are were created by the U.N.
The U.N. is, right now, trying to set up a $100bn PER YEAR ‘climate’ slush fund with no accountability and no legal oversight.
Damn sure he’s going to say anything he can to try to push through that little baby.
P. Solar says:
November 30, 2012 at 10:12 am
The U.N. is, right now, trying to set up a $100bn PER YEAR ‘climate’ slush fund with no accountability and no legal oversight.
_______________________________________________
Got any links??
OK, I am going to mention the elephant in the room here and ask the question… how many of the names on that list are practicing climate scientists? And before you all jump down my throat, it is very relevant. While it is nice to have clever people support the cause, in terms of carrying any weight…. this is pretty much a container full of feathers.
Simon:
Your post at November 30, 2012 at 10:53 am is a nice try but a complete fail. It says
OK, I am going to mention the elephant in the room here and ask the question… how many of the names on that list are practicing climate scientists? And before you all jump down my throat, it is very relevant. While it is nice to have clever people support the cause, in terms of carrying any weight…. this is pretty much a container full of feathers.
Man- Bear -Pig came out of his cave after the election and looked up at the sky. He shook his head exclaiming “Four more years of snow!” That pretty much sums up CAGW and the climate of politics.
Simon says:
November 30, 2012 at 10:53 am
OK, I am going to mention the elephant in the room here and ask the question… how many of the names on that list are practicing climate scientists? And before you all jump down my throat, it is very relevant. While it is nice to have clever people support the cause, in terms of carrying any weight…. this is pretty much a container full of feathers.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Pretty much all of them if you bother to read the list. The container in this case appears to be your head.
@Gail Combs
Here you go Gail.
http://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/environment/item/13749-un-seeking-global-carbon-regime-at-climate-summit-in-doha
Also, please see the above video which documents the commitment of 10% the Carbon Tax in Australia to the UN – an amount which will increase over time.
The science might not be settled, but these people’s opinions are. Won’t make a bit of difference, unfortunately.
richardscourtney
Sorry I mean actual climate scientists… not scientists.
Gail Combs says:
November 30, 2012 at 10:49 am
P. Solar says:
November 30, 2012 at 10:12 am
The U.N. is, right now, trying to set up a $100bn PER YEAR ‘climate’ slush fund with no accountability and no legal oversight.
_______________________________________________
Got any links??
AFAICR it was on WUWT. re Durban meeting last year. All ministers signed ‘something’ but UN were doing their best to make sure no one knew what the text actually was. Proposed climate fund to be ‘managed’ by world bank. This is fundamentally what Durban was about. AFAICR they signed an agreedment that they would sign something legally binding by 2015.
An annual budget of that size would effectively be the treasury for their nacent world goverment. All in the hands of unelected beaurocrat politicians with the legal immunity of U.N.
What’s could possibly go wrong with such a system?