Guest essay by Eric Worrall
Professors at Cambridge University are worried that climate issues are “slipping down the government’s list of priorities”. But they have a plan, for engineering one last colossal splurge of taxpayer’s cash.
UK must not cool stance on global warming
February 2, 2017, by Terry Macalister
World-renowned British scientist Martin Rees has urged the UK government to prioritise global warming, and warns of the danger of not taking urgent action.
LONDON, 2 February, 2017 – One of Britain’s most senior scientists has expressed concern that action to tackle global warming is sliding down the government’s list of priorities despite its ratification of the Paris Agreement on climate change.
Martin Rees, the Astronomer Royal and former president of the Royal Society, says politicians should not be distracted or listen to “siren voices” seeking to dissuade them from early action.
“I worry that we have to wait till the downsides of climate change are even more apparent than they are today before action is taken,” he says.
“It may be slipping down the agenda and may not get much ideological support, and that is why I have been banging on about increasing research and development of clean energy, which gets broad support even from those who are not so enthusiastic about climate action.
“They [many politicians] like hi-tech, and they are right to think that the quickest way to bring down emissions is by accelerating the development of efficient, clean energy.”
…
Read more: http://climatenewsnetwork.net/uk-must-not-cool-stance-global-warming/
The professors are currently holding a series of lectures to promote climate awareness.
This effort might seem a genteel, inconsequential professorial sort of thing, but make no mistake, this is a last stand by the climate community. To make renewables viable, they are demanding a worldwide commitment to fund a global Climate Apollo Project – up to US $230 billion over 10 years, just for the R&D.
Most if not all social and biological systems have a significant component that follows a students-T curve. There is an initiation, acceleration, peak, then rapid decline. Very similar to statistical normal distributions. The climate alarm agenda has peaked, and its future does not involve any more upward trend. From a population response standpoint, the end is inevitable. Just a matter of how far that decline legs tapers out. Once you predict mass extinction, other than causing the planet to fall into the sun tomorrow, there is not much more you can do to ratchet up the rhetoric. Consider the climate agenda a fad, just on a longer time scale. Fads last up to two years in fashion. This one has been quite a bit longer, perhaps due to the scope of the social involvement and the amount of data that had to be acquired.
Sublime reasoning!
Add that so many gravy-trainers are troughing at the public purse that they have built a momentum difficult to reverse.
“It may be slipping down the agenda and may not get much ideological support…”
And there it is, support for an ideology. Last time I checked science was about facts based on empirical evidence defined by observation and replication. Don’t expect funding for something, when all you predict is repeated failed junk claims on ‘the end of days’ or ‘doomsday’ like many other religions.
He’s probably talking about us deplorable voters again…
Margaret Thatcher pushed Global Warming into politics for her own purposes. Maybe current politicians don’t have quite the same urges.
She also dumped it.
But the genie was by then out of the bottle……..
A few years back there was a political group/think push for more expensive diesel cars with better fuel consumption to replace petrol ones, on the false premise that CO2 was the main problem.
As a consequence millions of people around the world are now breathing a toxic brew of NO’s and carbon particulates daily.
Latest EU Emission Standards (Euro6) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_emission_standards#Emission_standards_for_passenger_cars require diesel cars to be almost as ‘clean’ as petrol cars, and yet still emit half the CO.
Of course it is the older diesel cars we need to get off the road. But people shouldn’t be shamed from buying a diesel car and driven towards more expensive petrol hybrids – which are about the only way you will get something cleaner
A brew anyway. There’s no evidence whatsoever that it’s toxic. PMs are simply more junk science.
Where are the dead bodies? Life expectancy continues to grow.
Hey, chaps, notice that Rees’ meme has gone from global warming to clean energy. This is the big upcoming switch.
Cambridge, home of traitors like Blake, Philby and Co has some backing from the state propaganda unit…
Storms in December 2015 linked to climate change caused more than £3.5m worth of damage to cricket clubs in the UK, says a report.
The “Weather Warning” report, which comes from the Climate Coalition, is backed by more than 100 organisations including the WWF-UK, the RSPB, the National Trust and the Women’s Institute.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/38888624
The Women’s Institute is famous for making jams and preserves. Who knew they were climate experts too?
Isn’t the real problem for these people: Cambridge Professors Worried that UK Govenment is Losing Interest in Cambridge Professors?
Yes indeed I think this is so. Like the once prestigious societies and journals, most of academia has become a leftist indoctrination rat hole and everyone knows that global warming is simply one of the central tenets of that political ideology. Public credibility and respect has been largely destroyed and clowns like Rees and the rest of the idiotic ‘Expertariat’ just haven’t woken up to the fact that they and their brain-dead climate alarmism are being rejected along with the political liberal left of which they are merely a willing organ.
It’s a bit of a mystery to me exactly why he made the fundamental error of gross overreach to champion what any physical scientist with a couple of neurons to rub together can plainly see is totally unevidenced insanity on a stick. What stands at a tipping point is Rees’ own career and it is sad to watch a man of that kind of stature desperately puffing wind into a rapidly deflating balloon with a skin beginning to resemble a Cantor gasket.
Yes indeed I think this is so. Like the once prestigious societies and journals, most of academia has become a leftist indoctrination rat hole and everyone knows that global warming is simply one of the central tenets of that political ideology. Public credibility and respect has been largely destroyed and clowns like Rees and the rest of the idiotic ‘Expertariat’ just haven’t woken up to the fact that they and their brain-dead climate alarmism are being rejected along with the political liberal left of which they are merely a willing organ.
It’s a bit of a mystery to me exactly why he made the fundamental error of gross overreach to champion what any physical scientist with a couple of neurons to rub together can plainly see is totally unevidenced insanity on a stick. What stands at a tipping point is Rees’ own career and it is sad to watch a man of that kind of stature desperately puffing wind into a rapidly deflating balloon with a skin beginning to resemble a Cantor gasket.
For Cambridge professor read…
Peter Wadhams
I used to live in Cambridge..
They replaced a perfectly good cycle lane with a whizzy new one, which made the main road narrower, because they were GIVEN THE MONEY….
This is always the way these things go. For a while, whilst action appears free an people care (because it’s new), politicians will “do something”.
But once the actions start to have consequences, and people start to understand that they are paying out money to save the world, and yet disaster seems to be as far away as ever, politicians realise they have to get elected, and there are more important things to try and deal with.
Climate change wasn’t much of an issue here in 2015, it wasn’t much of an issue in the US last year, it doesn’t get any mention in France at the moment, and even the Dutch seem more interested in real life.
Re, the headline: They are worried that the gravy train has reached it’s final destination and the good life is over for the parrots and their invisible 97% faux statistics, IMO.
Since Martin Rees is the Astronomer Royal and is interested in climate change shouldn’t he be in favour of more research into Svensmark’s hypothesis?
Though Media Refuse To Admit, CERN Results Vastly Strengthen Svensmark’s Cosmic Ray-Climate Theory -http://notrickszone.com/2016/05/30/though-media-refuse-to-admit-cern-results-vastly-strengthen-svensmarks-cosmic-ray-climate-theory/
Much energy R&D has been wasted on expensive to make biofuels and pie-in-the-sky energy storage dreams. Advanced nuclear reactors such as LMFBR and MSR will happen anyway. Can better be speeded up with deregulation and reregulation. More money in that direction isn’t going to make researchers skilled and dedicated enough to make technological breakthroughs, nor speed up the slow pace of regulatory approval. [The next design to be approved in UK by our Office of Nuclear Regulation (ONR) – Westinghouse’s AP1000 – will have taken over 10 years to approve. The design submission was in 2007 and approval is expected within 2 months (March 2017)]. Fusion will continue to waste money that could have been spent on advanced fission (such as MSR and LMFBR). To the best of my knowledge: Martin Rees never speaks up about mis-directed research. He mostly wants to see the R&D gravy train expanded whether or not it brings any benefits. Presumably with the moon-race mentality of “it gave us Teflon so must’ve been worth all the dosh”. It’s almost as if he’s piggy-backing on CAGW: “Who cares how bad AGW will be? We need to concentrate on milking it for what its worth.” I imagine him saying privately.
Proffs, you are about to get a bonus education that will give the humility you lack. See you in 10yrs.