Lies and Manipulation: The Sorry State of Global Climate Alarmism

Guest opinion by Vijay Jayaraj

As a citizen of a third-world country, I bring a different perspective about climate change from that held by most people in wealthy countries. While they fret about possible tenth-of-a-degree changes in global average temperature, I think about how a billion of my fellow Indians and I will obtain the food, water, health care, and other things we need that our richer neighbors take for granted.

So we puzzle when we observe climate alarmists on a scaremongering crusade following the recent hurricanes in the Atlantic. They saw hurricanes Harvey, Irma, and Maria as providing another opportunity to blame climate change. Indeed, they tend to hold human-driven climate change guilty for the occurrence of any natural disaster.

But this is common only in the mainstream media. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), a leading authority on climate-change science and policy, admits in its assessment reports that there is no significant increase in the frequency of natural disasters.

Climatologists too were quick to point out that hurricane frequency in the past four decades has no increasing trend, contrary to claims by the climate alarmism propagandists.

In addition, anyone who respects data will agree that there were major hurricanes before the climate change narrative even began.

Nevertheless, weirder claims have been made about the negative impact of anthropogenic global warming on the food security of third-world countries.

But the state of the climate in some developing countries like India paints a very contrasting, indeed a promising, picture.

With its large and rapidly growing economy, India plays a key role in the global economy. Climatic effects can have a huge impact on the country’s large agricultural sector and eventually on the lives of a billion people.

Monsoon rains are the lifeline for crops in India. The monsoons have remained stable over the past 15 years and have shown no adverse changes in pattern.

Most recent research shows that monsoon rains in the past 15 years have ended a 50-year dry spell that was prevalent over North-Central India. Since 2002, rainfall has increased by 1.34 mm per decade since 2002.

Strongly sustained by these rains, and buoyed by the inventions in agricultural science and technology, the country’s agricultural production increased dramatically. For example, cereal yield increased 58 percent from 1990 to 2014, rising from 1687 to about 2662 pounds/acre.

The food production index (changes in the production of food crops in a given year relative to a base year) more than doubled, from 69.81 in 1990 to 145.1 in 2014. India’s total food grain production in the year 2015–16 recorded a massive 252.23 million tonnes, marginally higher than the previous year.

This should not surprise anyone who has a remote interest in the state of climate affairs. The global temperature levels showed no significant increase in the past 16 years.

Even the strongest climate alarmists acknowledged that the computer models used for prediction failed to reflect observational data, in what scientists call the ‘global warming hiatus’.

The models’ error can be attributed predominantly to the false assumption that carbon dioxide drives temperatures. Instead, in both long and short terms, temperature changes first, and carbon dioxide follows.

This not only exposes the influence of a bias in climate change sciences but also counterfeits the false imagery of a deteriorating environment.

Weather always holds risks—storms large and small, droughts, floods, heat waves, and cold snaps have been with us throughout human history. But the climate itself has been anything but dangerous over the last 150 years, and the evidence is there for everyone to see from the polar ice caps to the paddy fields of India.

It is impossible to save a planet that is not dying, and it is a disgrace to lead people into false fears concerning climate change.


Vijay Jayaraj (M.Sc., Environmental Science, University of East Anglia, England), Research Associate for Developing Countries for the Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation, lives in New Delhi, India.

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

122 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Butch2
October 24, 2017 7:24 am

It is a crime to deny Third World Countries the right to cheap energy, thus denying them the right to prosper and become a First World Country !! It really is sickening……IMHO

Chris
Reply to  Butch2
October 24, 2017 9:16 am

India’s government is a signatory to the Paris accords, and they believe that AGW is a serious issue.

Crispin in Waterloo
Reply to  Chris
October 24, 2017 9:24 am

Chris

You have not shown what India’s government believes. I will. They are massively increasing their consumption of coal for power generation. That is what they believe.

Developing Country signatories to the Paris Accord were promised billions in cash if they signed. Not long afterwards, they asked for the money to start flowing so they could get their energy production systems up and running. No money came. It is not going to come.

They were cheated,. They should sue whoever organised the Paris Accord. Breach of contract.

oeman50
Reply to  Chris
October 24, 2017 9:26 am

Maybe, but what they really believe it is a way to get financial aid from the first-world nations.

Don K
Reply to  Chris
October 24, 2017 9:38 am

We seem to be missing a few points here. India may or may not take AGW seriously. But they are a developing country and the Paris Agreement places no obligations on them with regard to GHG emissions. So, no Indians are not denied cheap energy. And no, they are not obligated to fight AGW until they get their standard of living up to a decent level. At which point, I would anticipate that US and EU GHG emissions will be a distant third to those of China and India with their huge populations.

Working this out is not rocket science. Why it appears to be beyond the capabilities of AGW alarmists, the news media, world “leaders”, and their advisors eludes me.

Juan Slayton
Reply to  Chris
October 24, 2017 9:45 am

Maybe not too serious….

NEW DELHI (Reuters) – India’s state-run power utility plans to invest $10 billion in new coal-fired power stations over the next five years despite the electricity regulator’s assessment that thermal plants now under construction will be able to meet demand until 2027.

More at: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-india-power-ntpc-exclusive/exclusive-indian-utility-bets-10-billion-on-coal-power-despite-surplus-green-concerns-idUSKBN19P1NC

MarkW
Reply to  Chris
October 24, 2017 10:27 am

You are correct, India’s government hopes that by being a part of the Paris Accords, rich countries will send lots of money to the rich people in India.

Reply to  Chris
October 24, 2017 10:33 am

Good grief,Chris you still hot about that dumb Paris agreement,that quickly falls apart when a SINGLE nation refuses to sign in on it. The many nations that gets angry for not getting the hoped for flow of money from the nation smart enough to pass on that crap.

LOL

Dave Fair
Reply to  Chris
October 24, 2017 10:43 am

The UN Green Energy Fund: “Money for nothing and the chicks are free.”

Reply to  Chris
October 24, 2017 1:16 pm

India’s government certainly believes the Paris accord is a serious issue, with it’s potential to generate a large flow of money in their direction.

Reply to  Chris
October 24, 2017 3:53 pm

They think that Europe has lost its marbles, but “if they wanna throw away their cash, where do I sign-up” . Did you read the article? India has rain that ended 50yrs of drought conditions and their crop output has doubled in a few decades, 58% more on the same land area! Tailor made talking points allow the useful witless to play the game, but you have to read the article, and oh? You missed talking point #1: read the article first, it’s by a UEA climate scientist.

Chris
Reply to  Chris
October 24, 2017 7:37 pm

So multiple posters that India signed the Paris accords strictly for the money, but zero supporting evidence supplied.

Santa Baby
Reply to  Chris
October 24, 2017 8:45 pm

India Signed the Paris agreement because they have no obligations.

Reply to  Chris
October 24, 2017 9:23 pm

“Chris October 24, 2017 at 7:37 pm
So multiple posters that India signed the Paris accords strictly for the money, but zero supporting evidence supplied”

“Chris” invents a falsehood that India “believes” CAGW.
Evidence is presented that India is investing massively in fossil fuel generating facilities. Ergo, India does not truly believe CO2 is dangerous or that it is directly responsible for CAGW.

“Chris” then false claim no one presented evidence.

Ergo:
Chis is not legitimate and fails to actually read people’s comments. Making up stuff is typical alarmist nonsense. as is whining about “others” not presenting evidence while Chis presents zero “evidence” for Chris’s falsehoods.

AKA classic shell game of misdirection.

Vijay Raj
Reply to  Chris
November 7, 2017 11:22 pm

Chris, I continue to meet senior officials from the Indian government who repeatedly announce in public lectures that ‘CO2 is not a Pollutant’. The Indian government is recommending the corporates to move away from CO2 related chaos and concentrate more on local environmental problems like – recycling, reuse, pollution, etc. Moreover, I would recommend you to study India’s INDC (Commitment made at Paris). The country is gonna double its Coal dependence. The country’s chief economic adviser has asked for the end of ‘Carbon Imperialism’ and called for a ‘Coal Alliance’. Mind you, He is the chief adviser to the Prime Minister of India.

The Original Mike M
Reply to  Butch2
October 24, 2017 12:12 pm

” ..denying them the right to prosper and become a First World Country ”

But but … the elite left just want to be loved, they thirst to “take care of” a dependent underclass to satisfy their unending desire to always feel good when they look in the mirror.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/spiegel-interview-with-african-economics-expert-for-god-s-sake-please-stop-the-aid-a-363663.html

Shikwati: Such intentions have been damaging our continent for the past 40 years. If the industrial nations really want to help the Africans, they should finally terminate this awful aid. The countries that have collected the most development aid are also the ones that are in the worst shape. Despite the billions that have poured in to Africa, the continent remains poor.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  The Original Mike M
October 24, 2017 4:19 pm

Absolutely correct. Most aid goes to corrupt officials and politicians and rich in these countries.

Editor
Reply to  Butch2
October 24, 2017 1:18 pm

The Australian government has approved a large Indian-owned coal mine in Queensland. The mine would supply India with a significant amount of the cheap energy that it so desperately needs. A certain community within Australia is trying very hard to stop the mine.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4957770/Thousands-protest-Adani-coal-Australia.html
7 October 2017
Thousands of people gathered across Australia to protest a coal mine in North Queensland on Saturday.
Protesters in Sydney, Brisbane, Melbourne and the Gold Coast rallied against Indian company Adani’s plans for the mine in the Galilee Basin.
The protests were part of Stop Adani group’s ‘big day of protest’, with 45 rallies across the nation.
The $16 billion coal mine was given the green light earlier this year, with pre-planning construction set to begin next month
“.
Of course, there are multiple issues, but it seems to me that the protesters are driven predominantly by one issue only – CAGW – and use other issues for motivation and publicity. Methinks this is a concrete example of the crime to deny Third World Countries the right to cheap energy, thus denying them the right to prosper and become a First World Country (Butch2’s comment above).

Reply to  Mike Jonas
October 24, 2017 4:00 pm

So are these spontaneous aggrieved protesters or useful idiots. Let’s see if we can determine this:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4957770/Thousands-protest-Adani-coal-Australia.html

My God, it was even choreagraphed!

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Mike Jonas
October 24, 2017 4:18 pm

“Gary Pearse October 24, 2017 at 4:00 pm”

There are far too many people in Australia with far too much time on their hands, all paid for by the state. It’s why around 50% of my tax bill last year was for welfare.

Griff
Reply to  Butch2
October 25, 2017 4:54 am

Well who is denying them?

India is investing billions in wind and solar power, to create 175GW of renewable capacity by 2022.

fossil fuel and a fossil fuel grid have not reached millions who are now getting power from renewables.

and, by the way, Third World is generally considered an offensive term… developing countries is the polit alternative.

LdB
Reply to  Griff
October 25, 2017 10:04 am

Perhaps you missed the news because you were too busy reading the Guardian
http://www.climatechangenews.com/2017/07/24/india-diverts-25-billion-away-clean-energy-fund/

When they money wasn’t forthcoming from the Green Fund they diverted the money from there own clean energy fund. So no 175GW of renewable capacity by 2022 because the monies gone.

I think that is called sticking a finger in the eyes of the liars.

HotScot
October 24, 2017 7:27 am

Good article sir, well said.

Now the West has everything it needs, it focusses on minutia and forgets the rest of the world.

Tom Halla
October 24, 2017 7:32 am

AGW is the presumption that the climate is much simpler than actual evidence shows, and the model is embraced by the green blob and the IPCC bureaucrats, which overlap in membership and motivations.
Keeping the third world in their place is something of a default goal for both elements of AGW devotees in government, and reflects their shared misanthropy.

October 24, 2017 7:32 am

Nicely written and Vijay Jayaraj will be branded
as a “D****r” if he gets any attention at all.

Pop Piasa
Reply to  Steve Case
October 24, 2017 8:04 am

I expect the media will ignore it. It would be interesting to be at that university and watching what comes next.

John Smith
October 24, 2017 7:34 am

The greater mystery is – how did this guy manage to come away from UEA with a degree in Environmental Studies when he has views like this?

Pop Piasa
Reply to  John Smith
October 24, 2017 7:55 am

That was my take-away also. How did this clearly unindoctrinated perspective of the reality which exists beneath the ‘consensus’ opinions and ‘settled science’ ever avoid censorship at East Anglia?

Vijay Raj
Reply to  Pop Piasa
November 7, 2017 11:18 pm

I did not have a difference of opinion when I studied at East Anglia. After graduating, I had enough time to understand and research upon what I was taught at UEA.

DMH
Reply to  John Smith
October 24, 2017 8:02 am

My thinking exactly.

Dixon
Reply to  DMH
October 24, 2017 8:06 am

You bide your time!

Pop Piasa
Reply to  DMH
October 24, 2017 8:34 am

Yes, but it takes incredible self-control to avoid exposing heretical thinking at what has become somewhat of a religious institution (for the Church of Omnipotent Greenhouse in Carbon). I never would have kept from arguing openly for what I thought in my college years.
I salute you, Vijay Jayaraj. Please don’t be daunted in your quest.

Old England
Reply to  John Smith
October 24, 2017 8:29 am

Perhaps he became aware of what goes on in CRU whilst he was at UEA ?

Vijay Raj
Reply to  Old England
November 7, 2017 11:26 pm

Nope, I had no clue about CRU’s internal politics or functioning. I had no access. Just a regular grad student enjoying English hospitality.

Reply to  John Smith
October 24, 2017 8:31 am

Not everyone goes through their studies with blind acceptance of teachings of their masters. The world would still be flat were it not for the few.

ACK
Reply to  John Smith
October 24, 2017 8:38 am

Could it just possibly be that the climate crowd at the School of Environmental Science at UEA still do not speak for everyone there and that it is possible for independent-minded students to avoid the bulls##t? Perhaps we should invite the author to speak to this point.

Brent Hargreaves
Reply to  John Smith
October 24, 2017 9:46 am

My thoughts exactly. It’s good to see one of UEA’s own questioning the global warming religion. I imagine he kept quiet during his studies for fear of being accused of heresy.

Vijay Raj
Reply to  John Smith
November 7, 2017 11:19 pm

I developed my view after graduating, not while studying there.

Earthling2
October 24, 2017 7:36 am

“In addition, anyone who respects data will agree that there were major hurricanes before the climate change narrative even began.”

A sober analysis of the state of climate science. To think we even need to remember to remind people that we had severe storm weather in the past is telling. I suspect this will become more prevalent where it will be said that just 30-40 years ago, the climate balance was in some sort of bliss, but this is what is being implied with every new storm or weather calamity is now due to AGW and CO2 = Catastrophe Witnesses the recent hyperbole over this years hurricane season in the Atlantic after a multi year absence.

Urederra
October 24, 2017 7:41 am

Vijay Jayaraj (M.Sc., Environmental Science, University of East Anglia, England),

Good article. Shocking that it is coming from somebody at the U of East Anglia.

How close are you Environmental Science guys to the CRU crew? Do you have access to the HadCRU raw data?

Vijay Raj
Reply to  Urederra
November 7, 2017 11:27 pm

Never had any access. I graduated from UEA in 2011 and happened to be there when the ClimateGate broke out.

October 24, 2017 7:50 am

The models’ error can be attributed predominantly to the false assumption that carbon dioxide drives temperatures. Instead, in both long and short terms, temperature changes first, and carbon dioxide follows.

As long as alarmists and sceptici alike continue to believe that the thin atmosphere around our Earth is responsible for our over 90K higher average surface temperatures compared to those on the moon, we will continue to see nonsense models and their forecasts and have clueless politici spending enormous amounts to solve a non-existing problem.

Reply to  Ben Wouters
October 24, 2017 8:36 am

If not an atmosphere laden with precipitable water vapor, then what?

Reply to  Joel O’Bryan
October 25, 2017 12:27 pm

joelobryan October 24, 2017 at 8:36 am

If not an atmosphere laden with precipitable water vapor, then what?

We live on a planet that consists mostly of molten rock and molten metal.
Just a few 10s of meters below our feet the temperature is already higher than the surface temperature and increases ~25K/km when going deeper. The sun just warms the upper 10-15 m of the soil, and is perfectly capable of creating our observed surface temperatures.
Same story for the oceans. The deep oceans are ~270K, already 15K above the nonsensical 255k of the GHE (I’m unaware of any mechanism that can explain how the atmosphere can increase the temperature of 4km deep oceans). The sun is perfectly capable of increasing the upper 100-200m of the oceans to the observed surface temperatures.
The atmosphere just reduces the energy loss to space, no backradiation increasing the surface temperature required. But yes, after removing the atmosphere the temperatures will be (much) lower. This does NOT mean that the atmosphere INCREASES the surface temperatures.

Dave Fair
Reply to  Ben Wouters
October 25, 2017 12:38 pm

Ben, I guess the argument involves the impact of changing the amount of a minor atmospheric gas. Studies of the transient and steady state temperatures related to a doubling of CO2 (and other gases) keep lowering the “guesstimates” of the IPCC.

Everybody, keep a sharp eye on the development of AR6. If the IPCC doesn’t back off from its AR5 conclusion of wildly inappropriate “certainty,” they should be held to account based on independent work indicating lower TCR and ECS.

Reply to  Joel O’Bryan
October 25, 2017 1:07 pm

Dave Fair October 25, 2017 at 12:38 pm

Ben, I guess the argument involves the impact of changing the amount of a minor atmospheric gas.

Dave, my point is that this whole discussion is nonsense, since the atmosphere is not INCREASING the surface temperatures. The atmosphere is mostly warmed by the solar heated surface, and also directly by solar radiation (WV, ozone etc.)
Given the hydrostatic equilibrium against gravity the atmosphere is in, every molecule of the atmosphere MUST be involved in the reduction of the energy flow to space. So trace gasses like CO2 play a negligible role in this process.

paqyfelyc
Reply to  Ben Wouters
October 24, 2017 8:43 am

Atmosphere is. GHG are not.

AGW is not Science
Reply to  paqyfelyc
October 24, 2017 11:17 am

I think he’s alluding to it being the oceans plus atmosphere, not the atmosphere (who’s heat capacity is a pittance compared with the oceans) alone.

Pop Piasa
Reply to  paqyfelyc
October 24, 2017 12:29 pm

Yet the atmosphere can deprive the ocean of heat through clouds and drive the ocean cycles with winds. The .04% of the atmosphere that they anxiously dwell upon gets lost in the cycles of water and wind.

Dave Fair
Reply to  Pop Piasa
October 24, 2017 12:47 pm

Hey, Pop! [I’ve been dying to say that.]

Since cyclones cool the oceans, wouldn’t that be a legitimate negative feedback?

Patrick MJD
Reply to  paqyfelyc
October 24, 2017 4:23 pm

“Pop Piasa October 24, 2017 at 12:29 pm

.04% of the atmosphere that they anxiously dwell upon…”

It’s not that much. It’s only ~4% of that.

Pop Piasa
Reply to  paqyfelyc
October 25, 2017 10:48 am

Thanks for adding that cooling action too, Dave. Interesting that cyclones also occurred in the 1970’s when SSTs cooler and arctic ice was very high.

Pop Piasa
Reply to  paqyfelyc
October 25, 2017 10:57 am

Patrick- I suck at math, mate.

Edwin
October 24, 2017 7:54 am

Remember the Left in the USA and in the EU is according to them trying to defeat racism but only in the West. The environmental left, now very much a major part of the overall political left, believes that besides CAGW the most significant environmental threat is population growth with that population growth generally taking place in countries with people of color. They clearly do not want third or second world nations to rise to the same economic level as North America or the EU. They do not understand what drives population growth and what conditions slow population growth. They refuse to accept that a subsistence farmer needs a large family to produce enough both for the family and to trade for other necessary goods. If that farmer is faced with diseases like malaria or intestinal parasites then they need an even larger family since members are not functioning at full level. I was told by an Indian friend that the first thing an Indian villager buys when the finally earn enough is a refrigerator. Sure you can run a refrigerator on solar and wind, but it is nice if it stays cold all 24/7.

Reply to  Edwin
October 24, 2017 8:39 am

Here’s the Best news on Trump’s attack on the climate change religion since Scott Pruitt taking over EPA.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/19/politics/kfile-kathleen-hartnett-white-paganism/index.html

AGW is not Science
Reply to  Joel O’Bryan
October 24, 2017 11:20 am

Yes! A fine choice – somebody who sees through the BS!

Andy Pattullo
October 24, 2017 7:55 am

Thank you for speaking up and telling it like it is. Developing nations have the most to loose in a policy environment that thinks imagined future harms from a failing theory of climate are more concerning than the nutrition, health and development of billions of deserving humans.

Olen
October 24, 2017 7:59 am

Excellent and well put.

Dixon
October 24, 2017 8:04 am

How fantastic to read a positive spin on the inevitable changes in our climate. Especially when supported by observations (for which I take you at your word). I have no doubt that this century will belong to India and China – and Africa if they can overcome overt corruption. ‘Western’ democracy has become fat, lazy and risk averse. Moreover we do not realise (many of us) how truly fortunate we are from birth. I just hope that your ascendancy can be managed peacefully.

Dave Fair
Reply to  Dixon
October 24, 2017 10:49 am

I’ll be dead, but Asia will rule in the stead of the West.

Reply to  Dixon
October 24, 2017 4:05 pm

Risk averse! Wierd observation. They are risking everything, only they don’t know it.

RAH
October 24, 2017 8:04 am

One is not going to worry about the more esoteric when clear and present challenges to survival are the daily reality. If life were tougher for those of us in the more developed world the claim of catastrophic climate change would be even less accepted than it is. Even then climate and environment is always near or at the very bottom of a list of concerns of the masses in about every poll I’ve ever seen.

Dixon
Reply to  RAH
October 24, 2017 8:08 am

+1
Getting news from places like twitter makes it worse because 3000 tweets sounds like a big number. 3000 out of 8 billion. Not so much.

Tom O
October 24, 2017 8:12 am

If “climate crisis” was about the climate, Vijay, I can understand your position. But “climate crisis” is about world government and population control and the means to acquire both. This isn’t about “the west” denying 3rd world countries the opportunity to become 1st world countries, it is about those that control governments, industries, banks, etc., gaining the ultimate opportunity to control the quality and quantity of human life. Looking at it from any other prospective will eventually allow them to win, especially when the trend towards the end of the interglacial restarts.

Rebel with a cause
October 24, 2017 8:19 am
AGW is not Science
Reply to  Rebel with a cause
October 24, 2017 11:23 am

What a deluded f-ing idiot. Explain the plunge of planet Earth into a full blown glaciation 450 million years ago when the CO2 level was TEN TIMES what it is today, and RISING, Mr. Odumba.

October 24, 2017 8:25 am

A nice sober contribution to sanity on this topic. Regions such as your home country are often portrayed as the type of place where people are beginning to suffer most from the rigors of climate change. It is an outrage what has happened to science over the past 30yrs. As a climate scientist I hope you can continue to educate the fearful and deluded.

From my perspective living in a well to do country, we have the added injury of paying hundreds of billions of dollars (trillions actually including the renewables disgrace ) for this illusory problem that really is a smokescreen for a global governance scheme run by Champagne sосi@lisтs. We have been de-developing for over a decade and its our poorer citizens and the middle class that provides employment that is being sacrificed.

I’m most certainly not comparing our plight with India’s, but at least you are going in the right direction and we seem bent on erasing what we have.

Vijay Raj
Reply to  Gary Pearse
November 7, 2017 11:30 pm

Thank you. The Indian Government and Prime Minister are vehemently against Climate Alarmism. Now their position is strengthened by Trump administration

October 24, 2017 8:26 am

+100. Vijay Jayaraj, know that many on this site are from first-world countries and agree w/your perspective.

AndyG55
Reply to  beng135
October 24, 2017 11:28 am

Ah, but some of our first world countries, like Australia, are pushing hard to join the undeveloped third world status.

If the politicians looked at views such as those from Vijay, this would not be possible.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  AndyG55
October 24, 2017 4:28 pm

“AndyG55 October 24, 2017 at 11:28 am”

If you consider the debate about the NBN (Internet speed) we already are third world.

Vijay Raj
Reply to  beng135
November 7, 2017 11:29 pm

Thank you, That is comforting.

A C Osborn
October 24, 2017 8:42 am

Well said sir.

lewispbuckingham
October 24, 2017 8:48 am

Looking at the new website for Indian Space Research Organisation I could not find all the commentary about global warming and the IPCC, which was there last week.
https://www.isro.gov.in/
The aim is simple
‘Our vision is to harness space technology for national development, while pursuing space science research and planetary exploration.’
Their space program is run on a budget of about a billion $us.
Its put an orbiter around Mars.
Australia could do this, set up its own satellite system for remote sensing, using its own technology, particularly for agriculture, while starting its own communications satellites, placed in orbit by our own rockets.
Rather than waste money on green energy, this would be a worthwhile cause.
Having been born in East Anglia it is my shame that East Anglians have contributed so much noise to the climate debate, contrary to true scientific pursuit.
It is refreshing to see a graduate that can think outside their box.
The big need in climate science is the attribute of critical thinking.
When experiment does not support hypotheses then review hypotheses.
Don’t try to bend data to hypotheses.

lewispbuckingham
Reply to  lewispbuckingham
October 24, 2017 2:51 pm
Gary
October 24, 2017 9:04 am

It is impossible to save a planet that is not dying
– Vijay Jayaraj

Exactly.

Reply to  Gary
October 24, 2017 10:08 am

Neither can their campaign to save the planet fail, as long as the balloon is full enough with hot air.

“It is much easier to solve an imaginary problem than a real one.” Sir Humphrey on Yes Minister.

tom0mason
October 24, 2017 9:23 am

Thank you Vijay Jayaraj for a sane an rational write-up. Also I would like to highlight your link to a source of sane reporting at Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation

October 24, 2017 9:44 am

Great article Vijay! Fight the good fight.
Here’s an example of biased reporting in the BBC today.
They report that global wine production will hit a 50 year low this year.
The reason given is “extreme weather” but they don’t say what kind.
That’s because the reason is spring cold and late frosts this year.
They are downplaying that politically incorrect weather story.

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-41728536

John
October 24, 2017 9:53 am

Nicely done Vijay

MRW
Reply to  John
October 24, 2017 11:27 am

Nicely done Vijay

Agree.

Vijay Raj
Reply to  John
November 7, 2017 11:33 pm

Thank you!

Earthling2
October 24, 2017 9:58 am

It would appear the people of India are more able to speak their mind about AGW without fear of being taken down by the climate ‘establishment’. I always appreciate the level headed and accurate comments of Dr. S. Jeevananda Reddy here as well who I believe is also a climate scientist in India.

With a M.Sc. degree in Environmental Science, University of East Anglia, England, you are at the other end of the spectrum regarding having to support some preconceived notion of climate ‘truth’ as so many seemed to have become at UEA, which will be forever remembered as one of the forces of darkness in the climate wars. More power to you, and good luck to India as well in the 21st century.

Reply to  Earthling2
October 24, 2017 10:56 am

Yes, I too am amazed that you have survived UEA with your brain intact.

Respect. 😉

russnelson
October 24, 2017 10:06 am

It’s not “alarmism”. It’s “hysteria”.

Verified by MonsterInsights