The 12th International Conference on Climate Change is just two weeks away–seats still available

Via press release and email:

The 12th International Conference on Climate Change (ICCC-12) will take place on Thursday and Friday, March 23–24 at the Grand Hyatt Hotel in Washington, DC, and you will not want to miss it. Meet and hear the scientists, economists, engineers, and policy experts who persuaded President Donald Trump that man-made global warming is not a crisis, and therefore Barack Obama’s war on fossil fuels must be ended.

Our schedule  is nearly complete, and it should include key members of the United States Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the new Trump administration – which is already taking steps to restore sanity to America’s energy and climate policies.

REGISTER HERE



J. Scott Armstrong
Professor at the Wharton School
of Business at the University of
Pennsylvania


Susan Crockford
Professor and polar bear scholar, the University of Victoria, BC


Kevin D. Dayaratna
Senior statistician and research programmer for The Heritage Foundation’s Center for Data Analysis


Myron Ebell
Director of the Center for Energy
and Environment at the Competitive
Enterprise Institute, chairs the Cooler Heads Coalition and led Trump’s transition team for EPA


Roger Helmer
Minister for the United Kingdom in the European Parliament


Patrick Michaels
Director of the Center for the
Study of Science at the Cato Institute


Lord Christopher Monckton
Former chief policy advisor to British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher


S. Fred Singer
Founder of the Science and Environmental Policy Project


Benjamin Zycher
Resident scholar at the
American Enterprise Institute


These speakers, and more, will explain the benefits of ending Obama’s war on fossil fuels and what policy changes are needed to do this. You can review the details about ICCC-12 at the conference website.

Space at the conference is very limited, so reserve your conference pass today. Admission, which includes five meals, is $179. For more information, or to register by phone, call Nikki Comerford at 312/377-4000.

The past 11 International Conferences on Climate Change were unqualified successes. The conferences were extensively covered by the international media and allowed more than 200 experts to share information and ideas regarding the latest science, economics, and politics related to the global warming debate. More than 4,000 people have attended an ICCC. Videos of the presentations are available online here.

P.S. If you can’t make it, we could better use some financial support. See our IndieGoGo campaign we have set up to help defer some of the costs which aren’t fully covered by attendance fees. Donations welcome, no matter how small.

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/12th-international-conference-on-climate-change-environment#/

Advertisements

109 thoughts on “The 12th International Conference on Climate Change is just two weeks away–seats still available

    • Indeed, kudos to Dr Crockford for providing some sound science in face of all the projections, speculation and false claims.

    • The host should point out, when he introduces her, that the polar bear affair is a microcosm of the whole global warming scare, in several particulars, which he should name.

      • Unfortunately, there are some rocks in my back yard that know far more about the climate than 99% of the politicians in the UK who passed the Climate Change Act in 2008. It is not very hard you know.

      • ShrNfr – are you saying that “dumb as a box of rocks” is a compliment to those politicians? I agree!

      • Anyone who pays attention to anything written about climate change or skeptics thereof in Wikipidio is also “dumb as a box of rocks.” Look up “Watts Up With That” for an education on bias. (BTW, you’re allowed to edit any Wiki article if you want to.)

    • “Minister for the United Kingdom in the European Parliament”

      Thanks Griff. The fake democracy currently running Europe does not have any ministers at all, so little change of anyone being one.

      Meetings of european ministers of finance, for example, are meeting of national ministers of finance from the member states.

    • You show your ignorance Griff, Roger is very knowledgeable on the climate change and warming myth. His place on the panel is well deserved.

      • Jane Davies,
        Roger, as Griff points out correctly, is not a ‘Minister’.
        Now, Griff is not my favourite person in the whole wide world, probably by several billion, but on that he is correct. And that seems pretty unusual . . . .

        Roger H may indeed be very knowledgeable on Climate Change, but he is not a minister.
        He is a Member of the European Parliament (MEP); the EP has [per Wikipedia, which even I can edit] has 751 members, and (for some reason) 14 Vice-Presidents.
        Albeit, when Brexit occurs, Roger Helmer, MEP, will lose the MEP income he receives now.

        Auto

      • I know he is not a minister and I do not know who wrote the piece under his photo saying he is. But knowing Roger, when the UK breaks the shackles of the EU, I can say with good authority that he campaigned for years for the UK to leave and him losing his job is well worth leaving that corrupt organization. He has said so on many occasions. I trust very few politicians but he is one of them.

    • So Griff your standard practice is to play the man and not the ball. We were taught not to do this as children

    • And you are an obnoxious scientifically illiterate pathetic little troll who is paid to lie about the professional credentials of respectable scientists who your paymasters consider are likely to jepoardise their nice lucrative gravy train.

      What was it you called all the AGW sceptics… ah yes, “mad, stupid or paid for”, wasn’t it?

      What a thoroughly vile, unprincipled creature you are.

    • “Griff March 10, 2017 at 11:13 am

      Roger Helmer isn’t minister for anything.

      He’s merely an MEP.

      He knows nothing at all about climate and his career…”

      From your own link Griff states “Member of the European Parliament for East Midlands”. So you can’t even read the links you post. Talking of knowing nothing about climate (A made up number), if the cap fits, Griff, wear it.

    • Griffy!

      You gonna take another shot at Dr Crockford?

      Having the anonymous Griff critique the public life of an elected official is…peculiar to say the least.

      Can’t wait to read further in this thread to get more Griffy pithy ad hominems.

    • You had your butt totally whipped last time, griff.

      Your brain-washed masochistic tendencies are now coming to the fore.

      It seems that you LIKE being shown to be a monuMENTAL fool.

    • Griff since you were already stupid enough to make this ignorant claim in pubic and make a total fool of yourself, a wise man would apologise and the shut the f. up about the subject.

    • Poor griff , still hasn’t figured it out, have you little child-mind…

      … Carbonbreifs doesn’t do science or facts… they do propaganda.

      And you fall for it every time.

    • “she is a paid political commentator.”

      Says who? Where? How much is she paid? By whom? Is that her only job, or did she just get paid for an article she wrote?

      • In Griff’s mind (if I can use the term that loosely) anyone who disagrees with the client science gang does so because they are paid to.
        More projection on his part.

    • Griff vs Broken Clock
      similarities…
      Face, hands, internal cogs & springs, often wound to tightly
      difference…
      even a broken clock is correct twice a day

    • Susan Crockford is not a polar bear scholar. she is a paid political commentator

      Dear Griff:

      Before even considering making such an ad hominem attack, you should at least read the information on Dr. Crockford’s scholarly qualifications and achievements at https://polarbearscience.com/2015/03/12/on-being-a-polar-bear-expert-among-other-things/ Note the list of around 30 academic publications. How many academic publications have you authored or co-authored?

      Speaking about getting paid, are most of the scientists who are claiming that global warming is a big threat working and attending conferences at their own expense? And by the way what’s your source of support?

      And are most of those scientists on your side of the debate indifferent to politics?

      • Dear Griff…you should at least read…”

        That’s quite a demanding proposition you’ve laid out.

    • “Griff March 10, 2017 at 11:17 am”

      Even the numbers in the second link states populations are ~25,000, higher than populations in 1960. The, presumably, image in the first link is not available. I wonder what image that was, maybe the fake one with a lone polar bear on a small fragment of ice? Who knows, but the link to that is unavailable, speaks volumes about the “science” in that article.

  1. Myron Ebell isn’t even a scientist. He majored in philosophy at the University of California in San Diego, then studied political theory at the London School of Economics and history at Cambridge.

    He does have a long record being paid to oppose client science paid for by fossil fuel companies.

    • He led the EPA transition team and has a birds eye view of what Trump and Pruitt plan to do there. That is good enough for a talk at this meeting.You won’t like that swamp being drained, but your side lost.

      • Myron Ebell- Major in Philosophy…hmmm … EPA leader
        Stephan Lewandowski – Major in Psychology … Conspiracy Theorist

    • Well, I’d rather have someone trained in philosophy and politics in a political position than than a scientist who has ZERO understanding of politics, thinking that he is qualified and an authority on political policy and how to achieve it because he has a degree in bogus science like “climatology” from a “climate change institute”.

      • All the scientist , pseudo politicians have been able to come up with as a political strategy is to lie and make exaggerated claims to scare people into adopting their political objectives. When this did not work, all they can think of doing is shout a bit louder.

        They have the political insights and acumen of a 16 year old ( which is probably unfair to a lot of 16 y. olds).

      • And Nobel Prize winner and Global Warming Evangelist Al Gore was a tobacco farmer.

      • “Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7 March 10, 2017 at 11:55 am”

        Coal and oil farming too, Oxydental, family fortune made in “dirty” industries.

      • I’m going to use Griff’s term rather whenever I talk about the work of the warmists from now on.

    • Griff:

      Myron Ebell and I are poles apart but we have had occasional interactions for years. I hold him in the highest regard.

      So-called climate science is almost entirely political advocacy for interest groups with the remainder of it being data manipulation. President Bush made an election promise to reduce America’s promotion of the global warming scare. An important part of fulfilling that promise would be to reign-back the EPA’s promotion of the scare.

      Myron Ebell provided the transition work at the US EPA for President Bush. I shall be watching the live screening of his presentation at the conference with avid interest.

      On the other hand, I am glad that time at the conference is not being wasted by providing it to the likes of you.

      Richard

      • Did you mean to say President Trump, not Bush, made an election promise to reduce America’s promotion of the global warming scare?

      • Alan Watt:

        Thankyou very much for your correction of my error. I tend to proof read what I intended to write and not what I did write. Sorry.

        As you say, it was President Trump.

        Also, whilst writing, it may not be obvious to some that when I wrote
        “Myron Ebell and I are poles apart but we have had occasional interactions for years. I hold him in the highest regard. ”
        I meant
        “Myron Ebell and I are politically poles apart but we have had occasional interactions for years. I hold him in the highest regard. ”

        Again, thankyou for correcting me.

        Richard

      • So just when did you two Poles split up Richard ??

        I had you figured somewhat more Celtic .

        Just goes to show you can’t depend on anything these days.

        G

      • george, Richard meant there was always a Polish separation team standing between him and Mr. Ebell. :-)

    • Griff old mate,
      You are right.
      Myron is not a scientist in the same class as Al Gore (thank bloody goodness).

    • William D. Ruckelshaus was a lawyer put in charge of the EPA and he killed more people (>400 million and counting) than Adolf Hitler plus Mao Zedong plus Joseph Stalin (130 million est.)
      Why is WUWT pet rock still allowed to post?

    • Well Griff, our resident “judge” on all things political/climatic–what is YOUR CV so we’ll have some idea where you’re coming from, because when it comes to the subject of politics, climate, weather, geology, mathematics, etc. etc., I don’t see any discipline…

      yet.

      I’m waiting to see upon what you base your criticisms.

    • I wonder what scientific qualifications in the field of climate did the economists/politicians studied and qualified in before stating that a “price on carbon” is needed to tackle climate change? My guess would be none.Actually, it’s not a guess at all, it’s fact.

    • Griff: the great physicist Josiah Willard Gibbs was trained as an engineer, not a physicist. Dr Crockford has made valuable contributions to polar bear ecology and zoology. What have YOU ever accomplished, you miserable troll?

  2. I think you will find that Roger Helmer is UKIP MEP in the EU Parliament. A mathematician and member of UKIP, which is the only political party in the UK with a sensible policy on climate change and on energy.

    • MEPs have zero political power. Please do not try to give them an importance they do not possess by calling them “ministers” Their fake “parliament” is there to rubber stamp decisions made ny non elected commissioners, to give it a veneer of political respectability. They can not even raise a motion to repeal an earlier act of the European Parliament.

      Most people in Europe do not even know the name of their so-called MEP.

      It is a farce.

      • Oh boy. EU is far from perfect, but nothing compared to (an independence party of) a geographical and political island with a House of Lords and hereditary cAGW monarch day-dreaming about reincarnation as a deadly virus.

      • Jaakko K,
        Yes, pretty cool place, these islands [that is reflected in the winter mortality rate, unhappily].

        Our Lords is now stuffed with (mostly) failed politicians.
        Reform is needed – only nobody can agree on what reform.

        My solution is an elected House of Elders [English for Senate (from the same root as Senile)]; crucially, older voters get extra votes. Also ‘achievers’ [Olympic Gold, VC or GC holders, Company owners, Mothers, and probably much more] would get one or more extra votes, too.

        Some will disagree. Fine, the UK is still relatively a free-speech area.
        But – some universities are seeking to limit that to free watermelon-speech, it seems.

        Auto

  3. “Lord Christopher Monckton
    Former chief policy advisor to British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher”

    Not sure that claim stands up to scrutiny. He was certainly not given any such official title. Some supporting evidence?

    • I’m thinking he was some sort of “Science” adviser to PM Thatcher. Not sure “chief policy advisor” is a correct reference.

      But whether formal of informal, I don’t recall his former history being questioned before.

      But just what evidence do YOU have that he played no role whatsoever during the Thatcher years ?? or are you just fishing ??

      G

      • George, I did not say he had no role. I questioned the title. I would have had no problem if it read “Lord Monckton, some sort of advisor to Margaret Thatcher”

    • I’m sympathetic to the aims of this conference, but I would think twice about attending an event that includes Christopher Monckton. He used to claim membership of the House of Lords, until the Clerk of the Parliaments posted a letter saying that was untrue: http://www.parliament.uk/documents/lords-information-office/2011/letter-to-viscount-monckton-20110715.pdf I heard him speak one time at a seminar in Melbourne, and I wasn’t impressed. I notice that the Global Warming Policy Foundation doesn’t have any obvious relationship with him, and I wonder why.

      • Monckton is a preeminent speaker in any climate realism conference. He has done yeoman’s work contradicting the misinformation of IPCC, and others. His role in the Thatcher administration gives him high level insight. If you really don’t like him, there will be 35 other prominent qualified engaging speakers.

  4. Sadly other schedule commitments preclude attending in person, but I shall take advantage of the live streaming feed. Unless it is hacked by Russians, or Deep State apparatchiks, or angry women wearing fuzzy hats.

  5. The big question to me is how will the MSM cover this? Will it be like the past and they just ignor it? Or will it be an exposé of the shocking FACT that all the speakers have driven a car and are therefore unqualified to speak anywhere. Should be fun.

      • Come to think of it, I doubt that the MSM even bother to cover the annual University of Auckland Distinguished Alumni Awards Dinner, either.

        MSM is a bit of an oxymoron isn’t it ??

        G

      • seaice1 writes “I would guess the same way they cover any minority special interest conference-not at all.”

        Now you are on the right track. Let’s continue all the way: the entire manmade climate change is a minority special interest topic.

        I would guess they, the MSM tycoons at least, have abandoned the ship already. Rupert even left his own niece behind https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/03/08/the-climate-institute-to-close/. Perhaps few of their most loyal employees still have a role to play. But then what seaice1?

      • Heh – yeah, that’s why Skeptics/Climate Realists are winning; because they are a “minority special interest” group.

  6. There is only one branch of science that has anything useful to say about the future climate, Geology. They will tell you that we are at the end of a brief interglacial within an ice age and in the worst of only two CO2 crashes in earth’s history. Temps will soon begin to drop 9C over the next 90,000 years. The ice sheets will advance, deserts vastly expand and storms get very violent.

  7. I think ad hominem attacks should only be allowed by people who reveal their identity. That way the victim has some options and people such as named above will use a little discretion. GK

    • Not sure that would help. Say your name is Bob Johnson. How many Bob Johnson’s are there out there? Are you going to require an address and phone number? How much information are people willing to divulge in order to comment. Even the very bright ones may not want to “share” to that degree.

      • Sheri – if one spends their free time making countless attacks against various people, under ones real name, eventually the chickens will come home. Yes, if you are just a kid in your mother’s basement, there will be no effect. However, if you hold any position of any import, then it effectively reduces unfair anonymous attacks and smears.

        No, I don’t think id verification is required. People eventually reveal their subterfuge, as lies always unravel. If I say: M. Mann is a complete science sell-out. I should at least let him know that it was I, G. Karst, who said that. if he wants redress… I’ll be in the alley in 15 minutes. GK

  8. Why give Griff the time of day.

    If he makes a comment, leave it unanswered. He only feeds off contradictory views. He will soon give up.

    • You’ve got a point there.

      As his job is to derail discussion by whatever means he thinks necessary, lying, misrepresention, insults and any other odious Alinskyite techniques that fall to hand, he probably gets paid by the number of posts his malicious garbage provokes.

      So ignoring would hit him in the one place he will be hurt most – his wallet.

    • Melvyn

      If Griff actually said anything of substance, or could intellectually engage on any of the technical discussions, he might be a problem.

      He’s generally wildly off-base, seldom presents evidence, what evidence he produces is usually from The Guardian, Daily mail, or similar “document of record”, and (most endearing of all) his ad hominems almost qualify as self-flagellation.

      Bottom line is his trivial comments serve as gentle reminders of the dangers of drinking cool-aid.

    • I agree and after reading Anthony’s “state of the Site” earlier, I would suggest that he would start limiting Griff’s “contributions”. Just on this thread alone his and commenter’s answers have taken up over half the space, although I have to admit some of the things he says are so blatantly ridiculous, even I have a laugh.

  9. Griff unmasked…

    EGriff Registered on 12 May 2010

    https://profile.theguardian.com/user/id/4149361/replies?page=1

    Well I pick an article a day and arrow it the other way to the mob.

    Reccomended therapy…

    Also comment (politely) on WUWT and Steve Goddard websites. Find a valid mail address which is not your regular one: don’t post from work (other comenters will track your server and threaten to tell your employer – I have a secret server/mail cut out…)

    Paranoid, just a little?

    • Well, you tracked him down so… No.
      He is right to worry.

      I do not use my first name on here because being associated with any political debate is harmful to one’s recruitment prospects or ability to get contracts. Anonymity to Google is good.

      If you agreed with his views you wouldn’t have hunted him down. There are others on the other side just as ‘diligent’.
      We are all right to worry.

  10. Signed up and will be attending. Not much of a sacrifice really, as I make that commute every day.

    On a side note, I’ve refrained from responding to the trolls as it is my one firm rule – that one must never feed the trolls. So I’m dismayed by the discourse on this site. Let them post their drive-by molotovs and ignore them. A lack of response is far more effective at removing such vermin than letting them know they struck a nerve. That just goads them on. Grow up. Be the adults on this forum. Just shake your head in disgust then go about your business. To quote that august philosopher, Forrest Gump, “That’s all I’ve got to say about that.”

  11. At ICCC 12 this week I look forward to some discussions of climate policy descisions versus: 1) the philosophy of science based on subjective metaphysics resulting from any theory claiming dual realities and 2) the philosophy of science based on the metaphysics of a direct objectively documented reality.

    The former philosophy of science gives you the exaggeration and idealological bias of IPCC reports sponsored by the UN. The later philosophy of science gives you multiple independent and severely critical skeptical scientific works using open intense processes of dialog/ argumentation.

    John

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s