Owen Paterson: Fight Against Climate Change 'May Cause More Harm Than Global Warming'

From thegwpf.com

No New Climate Targets Without Binding UN Climate Agreement, EU Energy Chief –

Measures to combat climate change may be causing more damage than current global warming, a former environment secretary has said. Owen Paterson, who was sacked in David Cameron’s reshuffle in July, attacked what he described as a “wicked green blob” of environmentalists for failing to explain the pause in global warming. –Matt Dathan, The Times, 28 September 2014

There has not been a temperature increase now for probably 18 years, some people say 26 years. So the pause is old enough to vote, the pause is old enough to join the army, the pause is old enough to pay its taxes. We were never told the pause was coming along, there are – as I understand it – about 30 different explanations for it and nobody explains why the pause is suddenly going to disappear and we’re going to get back on the track upwards. So I’m concerned that the measures being taken to counter projected dangers may actually be causing more damage now than those dangers. –Owen Paterson, The Times, 28 September 2014

Europe should only push ahead with its planned cuts to carbon emissions if the rest of the world agrees to a global climate change deal at a crunch summit in Paris next year, according to the EU’s energy chief. “If there is no binding commitment from countries as India, Russia, Brazil, the US, China, Japan and South Korea, whose governments are responsible for some 70% of global emissions, I think it is not really smart to have a -40% target,” the EU’s outgoing energy commissioner, Gunther Oettinger, told an oil and gas conference in Brussels. –Arthur Neslen, The Guardian, 25 September 2014

In a blow to American hopes of reaching an international deal to fight global warming, India’s new environment minister said Wednesday that his country would not offer a plan to cut its greenhouse gas emissions ahead of a climate summit next year in Paris. The minister, Prakash Javadekar, said in an interview that his government’s first priority was to alleviate poverty and improve the nation’s economy, which he said would necessarily involve an increase in emissions through new coal-powered electricity and transportation. It would be at least 30 years, he said, before India would likely see a downturn in CO2 emissions. –Carol Davenport, The New York Times 24 September 2014

What cuts? That’s for more developed countries. The moral principle of historic responsibility cannot be washed away. India’s first task is eradication of poverty. Twenty percent of our population doesn’t have access to electricity, and that’s our top priority. We will grow faster, and our CO2 emissions will rise.  –Indian Environment Minister Prakash Javadekar, The New York Times 24 September 2014

Two Nasa astronauts, whose photographs of Earth from space helped to start the environmental movement, believe the images have been “exploited” by campaigners against global warming. Charlie Duke, a member of the Apollo 16 mission in 1972 who took one of the blue marble images, told last week’s Starmus science festival in Tenerife: “Climate science is bogus. The world has got no warmer for more than 15 years. It is a great irony that the images taken on the Apollo missions have been used in this way. We helped to start it [the environment movement] but I do not agree with it.” Walter Cunningham, who flew on Apollo 7, said: “Climate science is one of the greatest scientific fiascos of all time.” –Jonathan Leake, The Sunday Times, 27 September 2014

Germany’s energy revolution—its energiewende—was supposed to blaze a trail, and show off a new way countries could meet their energy needs without wrecking their environment or the climate. It was an audacious experiment, but it’s hard to read much success out of it these days. It’s hard to imagine a worse set of outcomes for Germany — higher electricity prices, a rising reliance on the dirtiest fossil fuel around (coal), an accelerated phase out of one of the only zero-carbon baseload power sources around (nuclear), and a less diverse, less secure energy mix that leaves Germany exposed to the machinations of exporters like Russia. –Walter Russell Mead, The American Interest, 27 September 2014

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
September 30, 2014 6:13 am

To “Make” something you first have to unmake what is there. You do not build a house on top of a house. Greens seek to remake society in their own warped image. In order to do that, they must first unmake it. That is what is happening.

David, UK
Reply to  philjourdan
September 30, 2014 6:41 am

That’s, like, really deep, man.

Ian W
Reply to  philjourdan
October 1, 2014 3:49 am

It was not the ‘greens’ that came up with that approach, it was the Fabian Progressives, who are unsurprisingly in the vanguard of the green movement.

Reply to  Ian W
October 2, 2014 12:55 pm

No argument from me. You are known by the company you keep.

September 30, 2014 6:20 am

Sic transit calefactio mundi.

James in Perth
Reply to  Alexander Feht
September 30, 2014 9:29 pm

Thus passes the warming of the world.

Reply to  Alexander Feht
October 1, 2014 5:34 am

Sick Transit, Gig cancelled
Back in the day….

September 30, 2014 6:30 am

Nuclear power is a total disaster for humanity and the planet’s life forms!

Reply to  emsnews
September 30, 2014 6:41 am

Nuclear power is the only (known so far) way for humanity to prosper.
Life forms thrive better than before around Chernobyl. Get your facts straight.
Though I suppose other people’s prosperity would be a total disaster for you, personally.
This is your latent driving emotion, isn’t it?

Reply to  Alexander Feht
September 30, 2014 7:06 am

I wonder if he knows what makes the Sun shine for all those solar panels …

Vince Causey
Reply to  Alexander Feht
October 1, 2014 3:23 am

Yes. There was a recent Top Gear episode where they were tasked to drive to Chernobyl. I thought it was a joke, but they did actually go into Chernobyl and got out of their cars. It was quite an eye opener.

John Of Cloverdale WA, Australia
Reply to  emsnews
September 30, 2014 6:49 am

The French would disagree.

Reply to  John Of Cloverdale WA, Australia
September 30, 2014 10:42 am

I wouldn´t object to nuclear power if the French build and run the plants in France. However, I do have a serious concern about the use of nuclear power by countries such as Venezuela and Burkina Faso.

Reply to  emsnews
September 30, 2014 7:20 am

150,00 year natural nuclear reactor doesn’t seem to have been that detrimental to anything.

Reply to  emsnews
September 30, 2014 7:23 am

Nuclear power is a total disaster
nonsense. without the nuclear power of the sun none of us would be here.
the domestication of fire is perhaps the greatest technical achievement of humans. without fire none of our civilization would be possible.
and yet fire regularly kills people. should we therefore consider that fire is also a total disaster? would we be better of if fire in all forms was banned?

Reply to  emsnews
September 30, 2014 7:52 am

Herpa-derpa. Use the thinky stuff between your ears and stop regurgitating anti-civilization headlines.

David Smith
Reply to  emsnews
September 30, 2014 8:24 am

yeah, right…
…I suppose you’ve forgotten about the sun.
emsnews’ comment is similar to the vacuous women I saw on a film of the New York climate shindig shouting, “ban carbon from the air!”. I presume she didn’t know what plants use to grow.

Gary Pearse
Reply to  emsnews
September 30, 2014 10:46 am

It’s killed 70 people in 60 years (half in Chernobyl a zero safety design plant), and significantly in the most nuclear intense society in the world, France, only one died and that was in the metallurgical plant where they were melting down spent rods (he may have been killed with a runaway forklift, for all anyone knows). Check out nuclear reactor deaths in Wiki of all places. People have even died installing solar cells in California. You’re doctrinaire, unsupported slogan must be a blast from the past – 1960s say?

Reply to  emsnews
September 30, 2014 12:24 pm

Name examples of nuclear problems. Don’t be a drive by idiot. Give us reasons to support you dubious statements

Reply to  emsnews
September 30, 2014 4:42 pm

Check out how civilian nuclear was supposed to be based upon molten salt reactors. They can’t blow up, melt down, are walk away safe and though to build bombs out of them. http://www.energyfromthorium.com

Reply to  emsnews
October 1, 2014 5:32 am

You had better switch off the Sun then!

Reply to  emsnews
October 1, 2014 5:37 am

No! The Green movement is the enemy of the planet!
(assuming that the game is asinine assertions made with no supporting evidence whatsoever)

Reply to  emsnews
October 1, 2014 5:37 am

OK, lets put out the sun then, if its that bad 😉

September 30, 2014 6:30 am

In Africa, it already is.

Alan the Brit
September 30, 2014 6:30 am

Greenalism = Socialism! Isn’t it curious that the ONLY solution to manmade global warming, is the establishment of a Global Guvment with punitive powers to wreek havoc upon Western developed nations, one that is unelected, undemocratic (other then within itself & therefore very limited), unaccountable, & unsackable? All those demonstrators in New Yrok last week & in the UK gave it all away, with their Ugo Cheves style placards stating “Capitalism is the Cause, Socialism the Solution”.

Reply to  Alan the Brit
September 30, 2014 7:40 am

They are all watermelons. Green on the outside but Red on the inside.

September 30, 2014 6:34 am

As the so-called “pause” continues, you will see more and more of this sort of talk. When the average voter comes to understand that the warming ended decades ago, he will realize the extent of the deception and react. The great mystery for me is the lack of effort to inform the public about the lack of warming.

stewart pid
Reply to  mpainter
September 30, 2014 7:04 am

Mpainter …. look at all the recent effort to claim each month as the hottest evah!
That is the game, keep the deception alive and the goal posts in motion.

Reply to  stewart pid
September 30, 2014 9:53 am

Yes, even very cool months like August. The truth doesn’t matter. Sept saw multiple coldest day records set – in some cases by double digits. But despite Aug being almost 1F below Aug 1998, the choice a day before Obama and al-Gore in NYC was:
– admit it was a super cold August, or
– claim hottest evah
The choice was easy.

Reply to  stewart pid
September 30, 2014 2:41 pm

There should be an effort to counter this disinfomation- but there isn’t. Skeptics are not organized and so the lies grow long legs. It would be simple to do IMO.

Kenneth Simmons
Reply to  mpainter
September 30, 2014 9:59 am

And kill billions of dollars?

Otter (ClimateOtter on Twitter)
Reply to  mpainter
September 30, 2014 10:01 am

Don’t look at me! 😛 I’ve been pounding on the issue for several years where I post…. and I would Almost say you cannot imagine the stupid I get back, but you see it as strongly as I do.
The Earth’s average temperature has gone up 2C since 2000
I know tornados are getting worse, I live in tornado country
water vapour can only enter the atmosphere by things getting hot enough to turn it to steam
The Sahara Desert was caused by winds blowing off of the Himalayas……

Ralph Kramden
Reply to  mpainter
September 30, 2014 2:15 pm

I think you would be surprised at how many people do know. Most of my friends are not interested in global warming but they do know it ended many years ago. Maybe that’s why they aren’t interested.

September 30, 2014 6:58 am

Another little hole in the dyke. Surely the little boy must run out of fingers soon.
Not only that, I note that the quotes above are from MSM.
Whatever next?

James Strom
Reply to  Oldseadog
September 30, 2014 7:09 am

I believe that should be “dike”.

Reply to  James Strom
September 30, 2014 7:13 am

Both spellings are legitimate.

Michael Wassil
Reply to  James Strom
September 30, 2014 3:26 pm

Alexander Feht September 30, 2014 at 7:13 am
True. But like ‘gay’ the word ‘dyke’ has been appropriated and, like gay, it will soon be impossible to use it in any other context. Language changes, unfortunately sometimes for the worse, I think.

September 30, 2014 7:32 am

Here is a quote from a thirty year climate forecast I made in 2010.
“A general earth cooling is thus more likely as was the case from 1940 to 1970 when similar conditions prevailed. Concurrent changes in the Arctic Oscillation suggest a pattern of meridional atmospheric flow will be more common than the more latitudinal flows of warmer periods.
Policymakers may wish to note the following possible effects on earth’s climate for the next 20 – 30 years. A cooler world with lower SSTs usually means a dryer world. Thus droughts will be more likely in for example east Africa with possible monsoon failures in India. In California the PDO will mean less rainfall with more forest fires in the south. However in the Cascades and Northern Sierras snowpack could increase since more of the rain could occur as snow. Northern Hemisphere growing seasons will be shorter with occasional early and late frosts and drought in the US corn belt and in Asia repeats of the harsh Mongolian and Chinese winters of 2009 – 10 . In Europe cold snowy winters and cool cloudy summers will be more frequent .
There will be a steeper temperature gradient from the tropics to the poles so that violent thunderstorms with associated flooding and tornadoes will be more frequent in the USA, At the same time the jet stream will swing more sharply North – South thus local weather in the Northern hemisphere in particular will be generally more variable with occasional more northerly heat waves and more southerly unusually cold snaps. In the USA hurricanes may strike the east coast with greater frequency in summer and storm related blizzards more common in winter. ”
For a recent update and estimates of the timing and amount of the coming cooling see:
Owen Patterson is entirely right in drawing attention to the distrous consequences of relying on the fatally flawed IPCC climate so called “science”. The entire UNFCCC circus is an increasingly enormous obstacle to global well being on a cooling planet.

UK Sceptic
September 30, 2014 7:47 am

So now you know why Cameron sacked Patterson – he’s woefully off-message and poses a direct threat to Cameron’s father-in-law’s £350,000 per annum wind turbine bung from the UK taxpayers disastrous greenie grandstanding;

Ian Wilson
September 30, 2014 9:52 am

Owen Paterson was the most capable minister in the British government. He researches his subjects thoroughly and invariably talks sense. His sacking and replacement by a lightweight whose conduct nearly caused deselection in her own constituency was a disgrace.
Owen Paterson for Prime Minister please!

Tim Obrien
September 30, 2014 10:06 am

Has anyone proved that ANY drop in CO2 emissions does anything at all to the supposed “global temperature”?

Otter (ClimateOtter on Twitter)
Reply to  Tim Obrien
September 30, 2014 10:25 am

Aside from making it even more obvious that nothing was happening…….

Reply to  Tim Obrien
September 30, 2014 12:31 pm

Not yet, but they are working on it….hearts and minds you know

Michael Wassil
Reply to  Tim Obrien
September 30, 2014 3:32 pm
September 30, 2014 10:26 am

Let’s use the ratio of $Mitigation/$AGW, because it’s always = ∞. AGW does not exist. Earth’s temperature follows the Sun with a couple of big lags. Infinite is way too big for politicians, e.g., who believe the denominator MUST be something!

Non Nomen
September 30, 2014 10:34 am

Climate Change ‘May Cause More Harm Than Global Warming’”
Climate has changed since the beginning of time, temperature went up and down again and mankind survived all that. Adaptation is the remedy. Obviously, the Warm-mongers didn’t get that. Will they die out???

September 30, 2014 1:01 pm

“Fight Against Climate Change ‘May Cause More Harm Than Global Warming’”
This is news?
I thought everyone who at least studied Economics 101 can see that climate mitigation measures, along with Agenda 21 measures, are exactly how one goes about depressing or ruining an economy.
The anti capitalists among us say the destruction of capitalism would be a good thing. I would like to hear their thoughts as they join the rest of the world population in starvation.

George Steiner
September 30, 2014 2:43 pm

For over 30 years the western world has been moronized. Today 90% and more are morons. Know nothing and understand even less. Couple this with no moral sense for the most part.
The west will decline inexorably.

Mickey Reno
September 30, 2014 3:09 pm

I know this is pedantic, but I wish people would stop using the term “pause” unless ironically. The alleged, so-called “pause” is a term of propaganda that assumes a future not in evidence. The word peak would be equally incorrect. The word plateau is correct. Only after temperatures go up or down for a period of years can we know whether we’ve “paused” or “peaked.” We all know the alarmist hypothesis. Let’s wait to see if the plateau turns out to be a peak or a pause, and not advance blind acceptance of “the pause.”

Michael Wassil
Reply to  Mickey Reno
September 30, 2014 3:34 pm

I think ‘stopped’ covers it pretty well.

James Abbott
September 30, 2014 3:54 pm

Paterson got sacked because he was not up to the job.
He wouldn’t recognise the environment if it jumped up and bit him on the nose.
Cameron sacked him because he was incapable of understanding his brief properly and was alienating so many – including in business.
That said, its a generic problem in the UK as it is in many other countries that ministers are appointed to portfolios without being qualified in the subject. There is a particular woeful lack of science qualified MPs in parliament.

Reply to  James Abbott
September 30, 2014 6:05 pm

The Times seems to have a different point of view on Paterson. They seem to regard him as quotable. People are starting to pay attention to the Patersons. So you can expect to hear more from him, I would imagine. Maybe he will replace that creepy looking Cameron as PM someday.

Reply to  James Abbott
October 1, 2014 5:43 am

when the government does appoint real scientists, they dont last long. They have a nasty habit of telling the truth
David Nutt (horse riding is statistically more dangerous than heroin addiction)
Edwina Currie. (all eggs are contaminated with salmonella)
and so on.

Vince Causey
Reply to  James Abbott
October 1, 2014 7:54 am

You may be right, but I would be surprised if Cameron would sack a minister for not being up to the job, as there wouldn’t be many left.
Why did he sack Gove? Was he not up to the job either? A pattern emerges – Cameron sacks those who make themselves controversial. Gove because he angered the education establishment for taking strong measures to, er, try and improve education. It is also well known that the Green lobby were outraged about Paterson’s position on climate change. And Cameron slippery fellow he is, followed the path of least resistance.

Peter Stroud
Reply to  Vince Causey
October 5, 2014 6:43 am

Absolutely right. Cameron is a confirmed warmist, as is Hague and others it the top of the Tory tree. Paterson sorted out the Somerset levels problem, and was popular with the farmers: He was a good minister, betrayed by a weak leader, to satisfy the green blob.

Verified by MonsterInsights