Heartland Institute Leads Contingent of Climate Realists to Paris for UN’s COP 21 Conference

heartland%20logo_1[1]

Via Press release:

December 7 events with CFACT and CEI include ‘Day of Examining the Data,’World Premiere of ‘Climate Hustle’ Documentary

The Heartland Institute – known globally as the leading think tank debunking global warming alarmism and junk science – is partnering with the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT), Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI), and other allied organizations to bring some of the world’s most esteemed climate scientists and policy experts to present the inconvenient, data-based truth to the United Nations’ COP 21 summit in Paris.

Heartland and its allies will be on the ground in Paris for COP 21 – what the global press is calling the last chance to convince the world’s governments to “solve” the global warming crisis. The scientists and policy experts Heartland, CFACT, CEI, and their allies are bringing to Paris for COP 21 will be there to prove with globally accepted scientific data there is no human-caused global warming crisis.

For instance, global temperatures measured by satellite show no significant rise for more than 18 years. This is despite the fact that the world’s carbon dioxide emissions since 1990 constitute more than one-third of all human CO2 emissions since the dawn of the Industrial Revolution in the 1850s. If human emissions of CO2 drive temperature, we’d have seen proof of that in the past two decades. The proof isn’t there.

No Global Warming for 18 years and 9 months

That is just one data point proving inconvenient to the global bureaucrats gathering in Paris in December. There are many more – and you can see them explained in presentations by truly independent scientists at ten International Conferences on Climate Change or by reviewing the four volumes in the Climate Change Reconsidered series, produced by the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC) and published by The Heartland Institute.

WHAT: ‘Day of Examining the Data’

WHEN: Monday, December 7, 2015; 9:00 a.m. (press conference); 10:00 a.m. to 2:30 p.m. (scientific presentations)

WHERE: The San Diego Room, Hotel California, 16 Rue de Berri, 75008 Paris, France

To learn more about the events climate realists have planned in Paris for COP 21, contact Jim Lakely, director of communications at The Heartland Institute: jlakely@heartland.org or (call or text) 312-731-9364.

PLANNED EVENTS BELOW ARE OPEN TO ALL CREDENTIALED PRESS

Location: Hotel California, 16 Rue de Berri, 75008 Paris, France

Monday, December 7, 2015 at 9:00 a.m.

Heartland fellows, affiliated scientists, and policy experts from the international “Cooler Heads Coalition” make statements and are available for questions.

Panel 1 (10:00 a.m. – 11:30 a.m.): The Latest Science: Why the UN’s Scientists Are Wrong

Panelists: TBA

Keynote luncheon speech (11:45 a.m. to 12:45 p.m.): Speaker TBA

Panel 2 (1:00 p.m. to 2:30 p.m.): Energy Policy: How the UN’s Energy “Solutions” Will Make the Poor More Miserable

Panelists: TBA


The Heartland Institute is a 31-year-old national nonprofit organization headquartered in Arlington Heights, Illinois. Its mission is to discover, develop, and promote free-market solutions to social and economic problems. For more information, visit our Web site or call 312/377-4000.

Advertisements

57 thoughts on “Heartland Institute Leads Contingent of Climate Realists to Paris for UN’s COP 21 Conference

  1. What are the chances that the conference will be canceled because of tonight’s terrorist activities? Alternatively, what are the chances that some world leaders will not attend because of security concerns?

    France was already on heightened security because of Charlie Hebdo. At least one talking head is calling this a failure of French intelligence.

    • It certainly is a good excuse to cancel the conference, if they are looking for one.
      I suspect however, that it will go ahead with massively enhanced security.

    • Yes, there certainly has been a failure of intelligence.
      I was born in 1971, the US was on the gold standard and scientists believed the climate was cooling.
      Then I left the womb – and it’s been downhill since there.

      • Well, I was beginning to wonder.
        I plotted my age against the NOAA temp 5 year averaged and the log of the US national debt.
        OMG – an exact fit!!!
        My fingerprints were all over it.
        Attribution proved, science settled.

    • Alain Bauer says that the recents events don’t show a failure of “Vigipirate” very-very-red (*) as it was never anti-terrorism device but only an anti fear device.

      (*) there is Vigipirate enhanced, red, écarlate, I don’t remember all the nuances of colors of uselessness

      Alain Bauer is a criminologist, so he is by necessity a realist and he is considered to be right-conservative by French sociologists who are either far left or extreme left. He can’t be labelled conservative given its frequent progressive rants.

    • Western Intelligence services who are there to protect our freedom were undermined and hindered by traitorous Edward Snowdon.

      • traitorous Edward Snowdon
        ==================
        spying on everyone does not protect our freedom. as mentioned, looking for a needle in a pile of needles is not good strategy.

        how many people born in country, never been in trouble, working steady 9-5 jobs for years, with fixed addresses, that vacation 2-3 weeks per year in country have ever turned out to be terrorists? I’d venture to say not a single one, out of hundreds of millions.

        So why the hell would the government see fit to spy on these people?

        However, if the average person in the street was to look at terrorists, you would within a few minutes be able to identify a number of common traits. These traits are shared by likely much less than 1% of the population. So you should limit your resources to looking at people with these traits, you will be at least 100 times more likely to find the terrorists before they act.

        So why the hell doesn’t the government allow profiling? To filter based on the common traits of terrorists? Because it discriminates against other people that share the same traits that are not terrorists.

        So somehow, it is ethical to spy on everyone, rather spy on a few.

      • Edward Snowden is the biggest American hero so far this millennium. You should watch the PBS documentary, “United States of Secrets” for an eye opener. It’s on Netflix but here is a Youtube version with funny voices

      • markstoval

        I agree that we live in a police state. It is even worse in the UK In London, on average people are photographed many hundreds of times a day jus going about their daily life. It is worse than Starsi East Germany, and people of the 50s and 60s would be appalled at the powers of the state and the withdrawal of freedom. Even in my life time I cannot believe how life has changed.

        The principle of democracy is that the government represents the people and should be held to the account of the people. But this has changed, now it is the citizen who is held to the account of the government. The government expects to be able to look in to every aspect of the citizen’s lives, but is not similarly open in its own dealings. In the UK, the government is trying to restrict the use of FOI requests, and to curb the freedom of the press.

        In Spain, a few months ago there was a story about a woman who was arrested for taking a picture of a police car parked illegally in a disabled parking slot. She was held in jail over night simply for taking a picture. She was eventually released without charge, but it shows how disproportionate and one sided government interference in our lives has become.

        We should be very wary of ceding any power to government. Powers taken in times of so called emergency are rarely ever relinguished even when the so called emergency no longer exists. At the moment in the UK the government is seeking to extend its powers of surveillance by making Internet Service providers keep a record of every website that a person visits, and is requesting phone companies to make sure that they do not supply unbreakable encryption software. politicians will no doubt next week be setting up the atrocity in Paris as a reason why they need to extend their powers of surveillance, and will argue that if you have nothing to hide then you have nothing to worry about. But we should all fear governments becoming police states. 1984 is a very telling tome.

    • How the hell would YOU know anything about French Military Intelligence? What kind of evidence do you have to support your idiotic statement? None? I thought so. Just shut up. France is in a world of hurt and all you have to offer is insulting statements

      • Also plus 1.

        I think that the intelligence community underestimate how little planning is needed to pull off such attacks. They consider these to be very sophisticated and that large networks, lots of financial resources are required, and that there must be a lot of cyber chatter before such an attack takes place. Regretfully, I consider this to be a wrong assumption, and this is why it will always be very difficult to avert such attacks.

        No doubt a number of the perpetrators will be known to the authorities, but unless there is a Guatanamo Bay approach that everyone attending extremist Mosques, or speeches, or who has travelled to terrorist hotspots or has recently converted to Isl*m or the like is locked up, then it is inevitable that people will slip through the net, and, of course, inevitable that lone wolf attacks will not be picked up in advance. You only need a group of mates to meet up at a Pub or a football match a few times to plan and coordinate such an atrocity.

        Further, largely for PC reasons, the Political leaders and security forces seem to want to trawl through everything all internet traffic, all mobile phone calls etc rather than targeted surveillance. This does not seem a sensible policy since the more needles one intercepts, the more difficult it is to find the needle with the poisonous tip. The best place to hide a needle is not in a haystack, but rather in a pile of needles.

        Anyway all best wishes to those caught up in this horrific event.

      • “Further, largely for PC reasons, the Political leaders and security forces seem to want to trawl through everything all internet traffic, all mobile phone calls etc rather than targeted surveillance. This does not seem a sensible policy since the more needles one intercepts, the more difficult it is to find the needle with the poisonous tip. The best place to hide a needle is not in a haystack, but rather in a pile of needles.” ~ richard verney

        The political leaders and other minions of the state want to trawl though everything you have because that is what police states have always done. They love information on their real enemy — the common citizen. The militarization of the police forces around the US was not needed to “protect” the public from a few dope sellers — it was to move towards total control of the population. (SWAT Team Nation)

        It has been noted that atrocities like the one yesterday in Paris makes the central government stronger in the long run. Some will even claim that some of these horrific acts are not without government help. (sometimes there is even credible evidence)

        I ask you to imagine a fellow from 1900 being teleported to today and asked what he thinks of the present governmental control of every aspect of life. What a tale his thoughts would tell. (H/T Gordon Lightfoot)

        It is illegal for me to park my car on the grass next to my driveway in my own yard here in Orlando. A small thing for sure, but it is one data point in the government’s drive to control every aspect of life in the US. There are billions of other examples no doubt.

      • Hey, lighten up. I’m sure that Brian was just making a joke out of a tough situation.
        it’s actually a rephrasing of an old joke/slogan that I knew as a kid – “military intelligence is a contradiction in terms”.

    • Jim in London

      It is not the fault of the intelligence services, who cannot cope given the sheer number of potential terrorists already in the country, or who can move across boarders unchecked, but rather the fault of Politicians who have open boarders and welcomed in these economic migrants many of which detest the Western way of life and are already radicalised. I am unsure that there are any genuine refugees since most are not coming directly from their war torn homelands, but have crossed other countries where they could set up home but have chosen not to do so. We have known for over a year that some of these migrants will inevitably be terrorists in disguise.

      In Europe the position is worse than in the UK, not because of the number of potential terrorists (the UK has tens of thousands, and probably hundreds of thousands) but because weapons are easier to procure in Europe and to make their way across borderless controls. Following the Balkan wars and the collapse of the Soviet Union, there are plenty of weapons. These can be bought on the black market and then driven across Europe with no real risk of being stopped and checked. At least it is more difficult to get these weapons into the UK.

      These type of rolling lone wolf attacks require little in the way of sophisticated planning if weapons are available. A few mates need only meet in a pub and say next Friday you go X, you go to Y, and you go Z and we will all start shooting at 8pm. When you stop and think about it, what planning is really needed once access to weapons has been obtained?

      The US has confirmed that it did not pick up any chatter in advance of the Paris attacks, so whilst no doubt some of the perpetrators will have been known to the French authorities (as were the 7/7 perpetrators known to the UK authorities), there has been no significant failure in intelligence. Western Intelligence is fooling itself if it considers that more extensive powers of surveillance will help thwart these low grade attacks that can reek havoc and destruction and fear on an unprecedented scale. More fear is created by attacking 6 or 7 targets killing 6 to 12 people at each than a large scale bomb in just one target killing many hundreds. .

      We need to stop kidding ourselves that Isl*m is the religion of peace, and we need to stop kidding ourselves that mere solidarity and proclaiming that we stand shoulder to shoulder with one another, and that we will not let these incidents stop our way of life is a solution in and of itself. Politicians need to grow some b*lls and start taking some firm and draconian action if they are to protect the citizens of the West. The failure to do this will inevitably lead to a rise in far right politics, and many more Paris like incidents.

      • I hesitate to post this here, but from a ZH Post:

        What happens next?
        One possible chain of events involves Syria suddenly finding full-blown NATO support for a renewed attack on Syria and, of course, Assad.

        The second path of future events goes back to what we said on September 11 of this year when we predicted the French terrorist attacks:
        … the second key role of ISIS is also starting to emerge: the terrorist bogeyman that ravages Europe and scares the living daylight out of people who beg the government to implement an even more strict government apparatus in order to protect them from refugees ISIS terrorists.
        Certainly expect a version of Europe Patriot Act to emerge over the next year, when the old continent has its own “September 11” moment, one which will provide the unelected Brussels bureaucrats with even more authoritarian power.

        So far things are panning out precisely as we expected they would; we expect this chain of events to continue.
        http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-11-14/link-emerges-passport-found-next-paris-suicide-bomber-belongs-syrian-refugee-who-ent

      • >>One possible chain of events involves Syria suddenly
        >>finding full-blown NATO support for a renewed attack
        >>on Syria and, of course, Assad.

        Highly unlikely.

        Firstly, Europe and America failed to get public support to fight Assad the first time around.

        Secondly, Russia is now overtly supporting Assad. So to attack Assad now is to invite all-out war against Russia, held in the Near East.

        Thirdly, the terrorists in Paris are HIGHLY likely to be ISIS Sunnis, not Shia or Assad’s Alawites. As I said back in 2011, in this particular case the bad guys are the Sunni terrorists, not Assad. So if you want to stop this particular brand of Eastern ISIS terrorism, the West should be allies of Russia and supporting Assad.

        Now I know that Western governments have been particularly dense in the Syria affair, continually getting the strategy and support wrong, but I would hope in this case that even our present US and UK political morons can work out that Assad is on our side when fighting ISIS.

        Perhaps I am expecting too much…. *facepalm*

        Ralph

  2. As the religious wars rage ever hotter, the desire to tax Europe and the US populace heavily due to fears we might have warm weather…is going to have less and less support with the public. The rulers have to focus on urgent fears of the voters and they are no longer scared of slightly warmer weather, they are terrified of being terrorized by terrorists.

    The global warming scam which ran alongside rising wars mainly confined to Muslim countries, are now roosting at home. The 9/11 attacks by a bunch of Saudis and a few others caused the US to go to war with Muslim leaders who were NOT connected at all with 9/11 and were overthrown and replaced with Saudi-supported Muslim radicals who are the ones attacking us today.

    Going to war against warm weather is going to be a non-issue for most Americans and Europeans in the future.

    • politicians love distractions. anything to prevent the public from focusing on the lack of any real solutions to any real problems. COP21 was planned as the “Grand Distraction”. Solving all the worlds problems for all time.

      Anything to distract the public from the real problems and the lack of any real solutions. Forget about terrorism, poverty, illiteracy, disease. Climate Change, that’s the ticket. Really. Solve that problem and all the others will be solved as well.

      • No, that is not really the problem. Terrorists in Paris and other places, refugees, poverty, illiteracy, disease and ‘climate change saga’ are the symptoms, Not the Cause. America[1] (and others?) are the problem with their involvement in the middle east and other places, is the main cause. The people with real power, who want control of people as you alluded to in your post above are the real problem.

        If you provide the world with unlimited energy (thorium nuclear reactors) and control those people in power, hopefully, you will go a long way to solving terrorism, poverty, illiteracy, disease and climate change saga.

        Regards
        Climate Heretic
        [1] Read counterpunch.com for insights into American involvement in the middle east.

  3. I understand the need for moderation. Hope I didn’t cross any invisible lines. Perhaps the hosts here can clue us in on what these are? Would be appreciated. Thanks.

  4. “The Heartland Institute – known globally as the leading think tank debunking global warming alarmism and junk science – is partnering with the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT), Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI), and other allied organizations to bring some of the world’s most esteemed climate scientists and policy experts to present the inconvenient, data-based truth to the United Nations’ COP 21 summit in Paris.”

    It is nice to see some credible organizations try to bring some truth to the Paris gathering, but let us know beforehand that it will do no good. (yes! a testable prediction!)

    Logic, facts, laws of thermodynamics, observations, and measurements (honest ones) have demonstrated that CO2 does not warm the earth. We can agree that any warming effect of CO2 is so tiny as to be undetectable. So there is no cause for alarm or billions in grants to the [bad word here] “scientists” that are claiming that we must dismantle modern civilization to “save” the planet.

  5. “For instance, global temperatures measured by satellite show no significant rise for more than 18 years. This is despite the fact that the world’s carbon dioxide emissions since 1990 constitute more than one-third of all human CO2 emissions since the dawn of the Industrial Revolution in the 1850s. If human emissions of CO2 drive temperature, we’d have seen proof of that in the past two decades. The proof isn’t there.”

    As a matter of both accuracy and strategic presentation of the facts, I prefer “This is despite the fact that the world’s carbon dioxide emissions since 1990 ARE BELIEVED TO constitute more than one-third of all human CO2 emissions since the dawn of the Industrial Revolution in the 1850s.”

    Lets stop pretending we can measure things like this to a level of accuracy that is just not realistic. Same goes for temperatures and sea levels.

  6. I only just discovered that BEST seem to have “borrowed” the HadCRUT SSTs for their global mean temp. graphs.
    Is this correct. Did BEST only really reassess the LAND datasets from the raw data, and then borrow the SSTs as provided by Hadley?
    Since most of the globe is ocean and the ocean data seems to present the biggest challenges in terms of manifestations of error and poor coverage, does this not represent a slight omission in the BEST analysis?
    I’m actually asking here, not telling..
    Until yesterday, I lazily assumed that BEST had at least tried to rebuild the whole thing from scratch from the raw records. Can anyone give me a simple clarification to save me hunting for answers?

  7. COP 21 is the “last chance” to save the planet because we will reach the “tipping point,” just like all the previous COPs.

    Now who are the delegates going to believe, the 97% or real data under their lyin’ eyes?

    And who will get the Monckton watch?

  8. Hasn’t a certain Obama B. gone on record as saying that climate change is the most important problem the world faces so what message does it give if he lets a ‘minor’ problem on street murder and bombings put him off attending? I think the zapping of Jihadi John is the trigger and it being Paris just before COP is a bit of a coincidence. Not this first incident in Paris or France recently.

    • It is acknowledged that the attack was months in planning. Not unreasonable to speculate that COP21 was the initial target, with world leaders in Paris, and attacks on a sports stadium, restaurant and music hall that would have snared some Western delegates.
      But the recent “insults” to their cause may have moved the operation up by a few weeks.

  9. How much CO2 is increased in atmosphere due to destroying of trees and increasing in human population ? It should be a very sharp rise.

    Percentage of CO2 out of fossil fuel is negligible in compared to the whole fraction.

  10. The term “climate realist” was mentioned in the article. I like that term since it is not about being skeptical about some specific issue, which to many people seems as just being negative for no reason. “Climate realist” implies that there is a positive and pragmatic goal and that is to find out what is true and what should be done.

    I would be more happy to tell others that I am a “climate realist”. What would they say, “We want you to be unrealistic”? :-)

  11. a positive and pragmatic goal
    =====================
    more taxes are seen as a positive goal by those that make a living from other people’s taxes.

    the pragmatic solution is thus to raise taxes. the pesky problem is that the people paying the taxes may object and vote the bastards out of office, unless it can be shown that it is for “a good cause”.

    So of course, preventing “Climate Change” is a good cause. Further debate is ended. Obama has spoken. the question is not whether you will pay, only how much.

    The only thing one can be sure of, the pain of paying to prevent Climate Change will greatly exceed the actual pain you experience as a result of Climate Change.

    This is the new “Pay Today” to benefit in 100 years program.

    • Not sure how you go to the issue about paying taxes from my comment about a climate realist who would want to know what the truth is about climate and what are the practical options. Wasting money on false ideas is never a practical option.

  12. I wonder how many will attend Heartland’s presentations? Given the MO of the Warmist Cult I’m betting there will either be an orchestrated walk out or non attendance. Which should be telling in itself to anyone undecided. I’m glad AGW skeptics will be represented but my cynical bone is tingling. Maybe the French Mathematics Society will have a guest spot.

    • It is not a bad idea to specifically invite them since that may garnish a little bit of media attention.

  13. When I worked in the Ministry of Defence the phrase was “the jumbo shrimp of military intelligence”. Cheer up

  14. Well they let them in? After all they’re considered more dangerous than Islamic terrorists by the US government.
    http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/11/14/22-times-obama-admin-declared-climate-change-greater-threat-terrorism/

    January 15, 2008
    ……”Barack Obama said the “immediate danger” of oil-backed terrorism “is eclipsed only by the long-term threat from climate change, which will lead to devastating weather patterns, terrible storms, drought, and famine. That means people competing for food and water in the next fifty years in the very places that have known horrific violence in the last fifty: Africa, the Middle East, and South Asia. Most disastrously, that could mean destructive storms on our shores, and the disappearance of our coastline.”

    January 26, 2009 [Obama said]
    “These urgent dangers to our national and economic security are compounded by the long-term threat of climate change, which, if left unchecked, could result in violent conflict, terrible storms, shrinking coastlines, and irreversible catastrophe.”

    etc. etc.

Comments are closed.