| A bit of refreshing news, via The GWPF: |
London, 6 September: The General-Secretary of the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) says that the alarmist narrative on climate change has gone off the rails and criticised the news media for provoking unjustified anxiety.
Speaking to Finland’s financial newspaper Talouselämä (“The Journal”) on 6 September 2019, Petteri Taalas called for cooler heads to prevail, saying that he does not accept arguments of climate alarmists that the end of the world is at hand.
Dr Taalas also spoke of the dangers of green extremism:
“While climate sceptisism has become less of an issue, now we are being challenged from the other side. Climate experts have been attacked by these people and they claim that we should be much more radical. They are doomsters and extremists; they make threats.”
And he called for the media both to challenge experts and allow a broader range of opinions to be heard.
The director of the Global Warming Policy Forum, Dr Benny Peiser, welcomed Dr Taalas’s intervention:
“It’s very welcome to hear the Secretary-General of the World Meteorological Organization finally challenging eco-zealots.
“I hope mainstream climate scientists and the news media sit up and take notice; it’s high time they put some professional distance between themselves and radical greens and start to question their apocalyptic narrative of doom.”
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Refreshing news indeed. I wonder from where the next such common sense news will come. I would like to think the IPCC, perhaps.
Not a chance! IPCC is U.N. based. They are the ones responsible for this whole fiasco.
Isn’t Cancer caused by damage from Free Radicals?
We ought to take all those Free Radicals and arrest them poste haste before they cause a Global Climate Cancer
(They are responsible for the latest Societal Cancer … fear mongering)
You mean far left free Liberals. And Yes it’s a cancer
The IPCC is a creation of WMO and UNEP.
Our society is being poisoned byFar Left Liberal Ideology, it keeps spreading like a cancer. If we don’t stop it our country will be a dystopian nightmare like “George Orwell’s 1984” Please vote Republican in 2020.
Once common sense becomes fashionable, there will be no stopping it. Everyone will be getting in on the act claiming to be the first to ”see the light”. Just a question of when….
Petteri Taalas – is a good man, a courageous man.
Thank you Sir!
Best personal regards, Allan MacRae
I’ve said this again and again – meteorologists don’t normally get involved in the climate “debate” as they’re too busy doing real science. They prefer “facts” as opposed to “interpretation”,
I recall reading a study from a collection of them doing work on temperature, rain and snowfall and climate change in the Sierras. ( collective noun for them should be a “Thought” of meteorologists?) They unpicked every aspect of the “work” that had been undertaken so far that was supposed to show climate change affecting that area. The conclusion, phrased in Meteorologist speak, was that the work was “not consistent” with what had been observed. (That’s Meteorlogist speak for “batshit crazy”).
Meteorologist = real scientist.
“…a “Thought” of meteorologists”
– I would suggest a “Storm” of meteorologists.
+ 10
Not sure about Meteorologists but Climate Scientists should be “A Conclave of Climate Scientists” given the true nature of the Klima-beist
Do you go to and ENT Doctor when you have a sore foot. Just saying that these are the real scientist on the weather. Our Sun with spot and solar flares have a larger impact on our climate then anything else going on. One day millions of years from now the sun will destroy the planet and all the rest of our solar system.
Thunderhead?
A “thunderbox” of climatologisrs perhaps?
The Meteorologists’ Revolutionary Front…
A forecast of meteorologists?
A crapshoot of meteorologists?
A Meteorologist Shower.
A “keg” of geologists…
Meteorologists work with models, and must live with and answer for their forecast results every week. They are judged on how accurate their work is. If they predict a sunny day, and it rains, there are professional consequences. They know better than most that modeling weather and climate is more art than science, and that models are simply crap shoots.
Grantologists know how much money they make off their failed models, so they do not care about accuracy, and simply change data if the prediction is too far off.
Yes, meteorologists are scientists. The others are scam artists.
It is not that weather forecasting is “more art than science” .. it is that the science is only dimly understood, because the earthian climate system is vastly more complex than the climate alarmists will ever admit to. The alarmists’ gig is entirely built upon a pair of falsehoods – that only CO2 controls the climate, and that only humans control CO-2. Both are utterly preposterous ridiculous simplifications for which the prefix “over” simply does not do justice.
Saying that the false premises of “CO2 controls all” and that “man controls CO2” are “over simplifications” is like saying “the Nazis were overly concerned with Jews”.
I never said weather forecasting was more art than science, I said that weather/climate models are more art than science.
“Forecasting” should include abandoning monitors and looking outdoors before performing the “art”
czechlist
You are right. Looking outdoors is much easier and also more accurate.
I have done that and by just looking to horizon and wind/cloud directions my forecastings are winning 4 out of 5. My “method” is very simple and best results are when I forecast opposite than that “official” version. Eye is much better “tool” than weather models.
My school was fishing boat where I “worked”(what a kid can do) my summer holidays when I was pre-teenager. Those old fishermen knew what kind of weather is coming and they told me how they can see it. Oh boy, those were the days.
No one is saying CO2 controls all, nor that man produces all of it. What is being said is that the additional CO2 plus other gases (i.e., methane) have begun to warm the planet above its status quo. We do have a real impact on the planet, and it’s the only one we have; half the animal species have gone extinct in the last 40 years.
Also from WMO website:
https://public.wmo.int/en/media/press-release/state-of-climate-2018-shows-accelerating-climate-change-impacts
“half the animal species have gone extinct in the last 40 years.”
Actually, only seven.
And let’s not forget that weather models are coded to produce an outcome based upon the historical behavior of similar weather patterns (ie, data), whereas climate models are coded to produce what their author tells them to, meaning that they are based on the beliefs, prejudices, ideology, political leanings and financial objectives of those who author them. To be more specific, a computer model will project rising temperature ONLY if their author codes it to do so. It’s like a quiz-master authoring and answering their own questions.
That’s perceptive. There is a fundamental difference between weather models and GCM’s used for climate. Weather models learn from the experience of previous weather patterns, and good, well tried numbers can be used for short-term prediction as a result. Short-term forecasting has made huge strides in the last 30 years. But such forecasts rapidly lose accuracy as they are run forward, and are of relatively little use after just a few days (you will see this in the major revsions that take place several times daily when looking only 3-4 days ahead)
Climate models can’t be run forward on the same basis as they’d quickly produce total garbage, so they are constrained by many assumptions which are added by the modeller, especially, of course, assumptions about greenhouse gases. They still produce something not much different from garbage, so are ‘trained’ on the past using subjective values for other influences such as aerosols to make the result look just a little bit less implausible. Assumptions are used to ‘prove’ the assumptions – they aren’t called General Circulation Models for nothing! These fundamental problems are not being addressed.
I am always impressed with the Météo France daily forecasts for my village — three hour blocks for today and tomorrow, six hour blocks for the next four days, 24 hour blocks for the eight days after that. And updated at least twice a day.
Provided nobody expects 100% accuracy at commune level the results are accurate enough to make reasonable plans for the weekend.
The “precipitation in the next hour” forecast is even more impressive, having been known on occasion to be accurate to the minute about both time and duration.
Stick to what you do best, guys; stop pretending to be something you’re not!
Apart from the ones who work in the met office,there just as guilty of scaremongering
Hopefully, an Impact of Meteorologists.
So the other day my thermostat fell off the side of the house in the wind, and I didn’t realize the “bulb” had moved until it was running quite hot compared to the temps. reported by the official observatory one street away. This morning I realized what had happened, pushed the “bulb” back into alignment, and voila! an accurate reading again. Told Mum, “Why not, everyone ELSE adjusts the data . . . !” 😉
Goodness me, this would be a dream come true for the countless people who are terrified of the constant “the world is ending and CO2 is to blame”… Image if scientists and other professionals could openly tell the truth, and discuss the effects of the solar cycles, the north/south flip or the earths weak magnetic field. for example. How human it would be to hear factual statements, which include the 1930s usa heatwave, and other natural weather events which have been happening for hundreds if not thousands of years…
Could the tide finally be turning? We can only hope.
Could the ride finally be turning? Check BBC Online: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-49515462
“Are forest fires as bad as they seem?
By Reality Check team
BBC News
…
“But is the scale of these fires unprecedented, or have there been years in which they have been more extensive?
With the help of satellite data we have looked at four areas – Brazil, Siberia, Indonesia and Central Africa.
And we have concluded that although fires this year have wrought significant damage to the environment, they have been worse in the past. …
Front page on the BBC https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-49609702 did not take long for the antidote to appear, bet Matt and Jonathan were bashing there IPCC press passes against the BBC controllers door.
Well, the article you reference has a link to the Reality Check team. They have not been burned down yet !
Published in an obscure newspaper in Finland. He has an august title, sure, but the mainstream outlet will never disseminate his comments. The Internet is still our only hope. It’s possible he could embolden real scientists to speak out, but a career is understandably too hard-won and precious for most to risk.
A prominent local (to me) meteorologist once spoke out on this very forum some years ago. Once. Discretion is the better part of valor.
Propaganda Ministry has done too good a job and now they cannot control the brainwashed drones set out to destroy the deniers in these last 12 years of our existence.
Off-topic; I knew a Bill Powers in the 50s in Northern Indiana. If you are he and recognize my name, email me at my first name initial plus last name and digits ’27’ @gmail.com., all lowercase.
The media have been in a full court press (so to speak) lately in a shameless attempt to gin up fake news supporting the false religion of a “climate change crisis”. The bogus “burning Amazon” bubble soon burst, however. Unfortunately, the public will recall the phony Big Lie more than the rational explanation. The media rarely retract stories, and if they do, it’s buried in the least viewed, read or listened to dark corners of their soapbox.
John Tillman
The evidence really does not support your “full court press” assertion.
We juxtapose 386 prominent contrarians with 386 expert scientists by tracking their digital footprints across ∼200,000 research publications and ∼100,000 English-language digital and print media articles on climate change. Projecting these individuals across the same backdrop facilitates quantifying disparities in media visibility and scientific authority, and identifying organization patterns within their association networks. Here we show via direct comparison that contrarians are featured in 49% more media articles than scientists. Yet when comparing visibility in mainstream media sources only, we observe just a 1% excess visibility, which objectively demonstrates the crowding out of professional mainstream sources by the proliferation of new media sources, many of which contribute to the production and consumption of climate change disinformation at scale. These results demonstrate why climate scientists should increasingly exert their authority in scientific and public discourse, and why professional journalists and editors should adjust the disproportionate attention given to contrarians.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-019-09959-4
Jack Dale: If you insist on trolling this site, you are gonna hafta take it up a notch. The Nature article you quote has been deconstructed here, and quoting it merely confirms you are a troll who doesn’t read much. Please come back when you have sharpened your pencil, this is not worth further reply.
Thanks for the warm welcome.
You are the one who linked to a “study” that wouldn’t pass a 5th grade teacher don’t expect warm when you link to garbage that is nothing more than a study in confirmation bias.
He was referring to the corporate establishment media. The bogus thing you referenced encompasses (mostly) social media.
“climate scientists should increasingly exert their authority in scientific and public discourse” Translate: “don’t respond to the science, attack their tenure, threaten their livelihood…” ??
Science does not recognize “authority”.
Authority is a subjective thing, science is objective.
Unfortunately, tenure is often mistaken for authority and sometimes is used to quell the ideas of those less tenured in the field. This is why destroying the reputation of contrarians is vital to holding this new political position which “science authorities” have falsely constructed.
The history of science, at least since AD 1543, is the rebellion against authority.
As Feynman so well put it, “Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts”. The scientific method appeals not to expert consensus, but to tests of predictions based upon hypotheses. Science is based upon predictions’ being confirmed or shown false.
Einstein: “No amount of experimentation can ever prove me right; a single experiment can prove me wrong.”
Consensus and appeals to authority are not just unscientific, but antiscientific.
Expert scientists and not pushing the alarmist agenda, so their lack of visibility in the media benefits the alarmist cause.
The issue is the prominence of alarmists who are ignoring any science they ever learnt.
Jack Dale,
Regular readers of this site are well aware of that paper. There are multiple articles here devoted to it. For example: https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/08/15/visibility-and-invisibility/ does a great job of debunking it.
What you and that ridiculous quote dont mention is there is little to no coverage on MSM ,of the buried truth,the BBC effectivly banned any opposing view by saying the science is settled.
Let me guess. Sociology degree? I’m judging from the gobbleygook speech.
JF
Jack,
Thanks for the laugh!
One very poor paper is not evidence. If you can’t be bothered to read the very many criticisms of that paper before posting it as “evidence ” then don’t be surprised if you get a dismissive response to your rather arrogant assertion.
Here are four WUWT threads on the consensus vs. climate contrarians article. There are probably more.
Visibility and Invisibility
Willis Eschenbach
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/08/15/visibility-and-invisibility/
Inside The Sausage Factory
Willis Eschenbach / 1 day ago August 18, 2019
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/08/18/inside-the-sausage-factory/#comment-2774763
The Nature Communications hate list – a fast-moving story
Guest Blogger / 2 days ago August 17, 2019
By Christopher Monckton of Brenchley
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/08/17/the-nature-communications-hate-list-a-fast-moving-story/
Is that the beginning of rearguard actiona ? 😀
Good to see. I’m beginning to sense a serious pull back by some groups. Maybe they fear that the natural cycles scientists are correct and we are about to enter 2 decades of rising CO2 and cold temperatures? A repeat of the 1960-79 period could be at hand. When the AMO stops its plateau and falls we are in for that type of cold.
Get your popcorn ready folks.
Where is your plateau ? What data are you referring to ?
If you look at the ocean ice ref page (on the top menu):
https://wattsupwiththat.com/oceanic-oscillation-page/
you will see historical PDO and AMO charts.
They show a similar pattern around 1958-60. PDO which was in negative phase 1945-79 released a lot of heat then went back to negative phase. The AMO was pretty flat at the top 1945-1960 then it went full negative.
“Past results do not guarantee future events” is the best disclaimer as it is a semi-chaotic system (climate). It is a very interesting comparison but I honestly have no way to know which way, or when, it will go this time.
no no no…encourage them to scream louder and more often
They are Screaming MEMEies.
An important positive signal from the WMO. Let’s hope it will be followed by more signals from the UN themselves.
But let’s not forget: UN organisations are the cause of many media hypes. The reason is that the UN is not restrained in their information by working according to the scientific method.
The way of working of UN organisations seems to be standard. We know this way from the IPCC. We also see this method back in for example the IPBES’ Global Assessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services:
“The IPBES Global Assessment on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services is composed of 1) a Summary for Policymakers (SPM), approved by the IPBES Plenary at its 7th session in May 2019 in Paris, France (IPBES-7); and 2) a set of six Chapters, accepted by the IPBES Plenary. Please see below to access these documents. The versions of the summary for policymakers in all UN languages will be posted here shortly.”
Source: https://www.ipbes.net/global-assessment-report-biodiversity-ecosystem-services
By this way of working (and again: by not using the scientific method) the UN allows the Alarm Movement to take position inside of the UN at locations which are crucial. For example there where the Summary’s for Policymakers are written and approved.
The UN and their reports are the source of a lot of media hypes and of a lot of extreme alarmism. By their way of working they themselves are causing the Eco Panic that widely can be observed.
Wim, maybe the UN diplomats that want to back the “settled science” should study Karl Popper or Richard Feynman’s views on the subject. Sadly, their minds might be closed to anything apolitical as true science.
An easy read to start with could be Michael Crichton’s “Remarks to the Commonweatlth Club” from 2003. Published under another title here as his second speech: http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/commentaries/crichton_3.pdf
We could do with some welcome news. In the UK the battleground is shifting away from “The Science” and towards “The Arts”; away from the UN and towards local communities; out of academic seminars and into the streets. In the UK we have a wave of Gretamania. For example, we sponsor murals of her. We write folk songs about bees, ice and coastal erosion. We have our local councils vying with each other to declare emergencies, especially in university cities. We have local authorities and policeaccommodating XR street blockades and merchandise stalls. Then we have a parliament which has passed the world’s only(?) legally-enforceable Climate Change Act, resulting in activists’ bringing lawsuits to enforce it. And to top it off, we have a prime minister whose girlfriend is a climate-change activist, heading a government which has lost control of parliamentary agenda, thus keeping us under the control of the EU! So this news from, of all places the WMO, is of considerable cheer to us in the trenches.
Suffolk Boy.
Quick recap if history.
100 years ago GB beats Germany at war.
1945 with help of commonwealth and USA etc, wins war with Germany , Italy etc.
1980,s, UK dumps commonwealth trading psrtners to lay in bed and suck at the teat of Germany controlled EU. Mainly because it’s too lazy to reinvent itself.
In the interim turns into big fat red wobbly jelly that doesn’t have the spine to stand up any more.
Churchills words, this is our finest hour, were profound, apart from the Mini, it’s been all downhill since tben. Let’s face it, GB has become a bit of a joke of its own making.
Expect the EU to make an example if GB regarding trading when it defaults, to stop others from doing same.
From the Commonwealth of New Zealand, have a wonderful day, and keep the chin up old chum, and once again we will join you in the trenches of trade.
Regards
Since the WMO is involved in the questionable temperatures’ “homogenization” process, in French we would say that the WMO Secretary-General acts as a “Pompier pyromane”.
(= pyromaniac firefighter)
It’s about time someone with authority spoke up.
From the article: “While climate sceptisism has become less of an issue”
I don’t think so. 🙂
“Contrarians” also get media attention than scientists.
“Here we show via direct comparison that contrarians are featured in 49% more media articles than scientists.”
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-019-09959-4
Lesson learned – get your science news from scientists.
Their charts show an order of magnitude more Climate Change articles than Contrarian articles.
Total bullshit.
I don’t know Joel, first we would have to discover what a “contrarian” is doing in a discussion of science. What does popular opinion have to do with climate science. Weird.
If at first you don’t succeed, try again…the hills are alive with trolling idiots today!
So self-define your categories, self-define the contents of those categories, self-define the instances you record and lo and behold your paper proves your point.
It’s not science but an exercise in utter subjectivity – the opposite of science. Sadly the large number of non-scientists who think they are scientists (sociologists say) don’t see the point because this is what their work looks like too.
What makes you think repeating yourself in a shorter form changes anything, that article remains riddled with errors and inconsistency no matter how many times you reference it.
In Finland Mr. Taalas has been one of the most extremist alarmists during the past 10 years.
Has anyone verified the article in translation? Based on a web search for Petteri Taalas, your comment seemed appropriate, Antero Jarvinen. Maybe this story is being hoaxed in an attempt to sucker and discredit skeptics?
I red the original article and the translations are accurate.
As (another) Finn, I am also a bit surprised that Dr. Taalas gave such interview. However, Talouselämä is trusted and respected magazine – so I think that there is no reason to think that this would be some kind of hoax.
I guess winds are really turning? Or at least “main stream alarmists” are trying to get some distance between them and the extremist?
I noticed that Mr. Mika Anttonen – self-made oil trade billionaire – who has been one of the most vocal alarmist in Finland (besides hoarding government money for renewable energy projects etc.) – has also turned against recent climate extremism. In his recent speech in a climate change panel that took place in a meeting of EU Political and Security Committee meeting, he said things like (translated with google translator):
“- If people are intimidated by the climate crisis, they will panic and many will lose their ability to act rationally. Nor do I want to see young people and children coming home from school and asking, “Daddy will we die tomorrow?” This (panic mode) does not create anything creative and does not help anyone.”
…and…
“- The EU is responsible for less than 10% of global emissions globally, and in eight years the rate of growth in the rest of the world will be higher than EU-wide emissions, and if we operate inside the EU, these climate actions will have little effect , whether or not there is carbon dioxide reduction in the earth’s atmosphere.”
This last one is something that you are not to supposed to say aloud in front policymakers – the official “truth” is that EU will solve the climate crisis together with China…
Forgot the link to the news article:
https://www.iltalehti.fi/talous/a/b2303a4e-4f01-4111-88fd-e49bcb491e55
Or all he is really doing is warning that going off the deep end of lunacy is not going to wind up being a big help to the cause of alarmism in general.
I fear that all he has realised is that all this “x years to save the planet” talk just proves they are liars after x years.
He just wants to push the doomsday prediction past his retirement date.
This statement by the WMO Secretary-General comes right before the news media of all the Western Democracies are planning on hyping up the human-caused climate change issue in the coming days.
Perfect timing.
Do you think the Western media will stop their upcoming climate change propaganda campaign because of this? Somebody ought to ask them.
Can’t see it reflected on the BBC Science pages yet, but I’m sure it will be /sarc
Certainly won’t appear on the ABC in Oz
A voice of reason, barely audible in the maelstrom of extreme climate change cacaphony.
Hmmm,
Wonder where this extremist view comes from?
Here is a recent WMO presentation with Dr. Taalas name prominently displayed on the opening slide.
https://phosphorusplatform.eu/images/Conference/ESPC3/Outcomes/ESPC3-Taalas-WMO.pdf
That was a surprise.
Perhaps. If the establishment remains true to form, the precedent is that they will recycle this marginally successful effort on a decadal basis until they can either override democracy (e.g. litigation), force people to kneel (e.g. harassment), or reach critical mass in a receptive generation.
Summary: “Back off. The proles are beginning to sniff out the true agenda.”
Yes, full-on, spittle-flecked ranting and raving Climate Alarmism is damaging to the Warmunist brand. Instead, they are offering Climate Alarmism Lite. Tastes great, less filling.
NO! Let the crazy ones keep talking. They are destroying to Climate Change movement right before our very eyes.
For years, people of good will have tried to debate the science on it’s merits, time and time again. Yet all those efforts were for nothing. After decades of hard work, they could not even move the needle the slightest. All the while we saw the Global Warming crowd make constant and steady gains in the political and social arenas.
Worse, perhaps worst of all:
Many of us feared that the junk science and charlatan “scientists” of the alarmist movement would have a spillover effect and discredit all of science in the fallout. And why not. The alarmist community played on the reputation of science as a whole as being an institution of integrity with the practitioners doing their best to be honest and on the level.It was inevitable that the reputation on science as a whole would be trashed as the game collapsed.
Now we have the spectacle of the UN, which was, and is, the primary driver of the Global Warming worried about reputations. They did not care a dot about reputations when they were trashing the reputation of a whole field of human endeavor.
These people must have seen the Democrat Climate Change extravaganza. They must have watched in abject horror as one after another candidates with national presence, demonstrated to all the world just how lunatic they are. Now here it is, just a day later. The UN could not get a press release out fast enough, desperately attempting some damage control.
The Alarmist Community built this monster, they own it, let them have it. Stupid them, they never saw the danger of this monster until it turned on them. Good enough.
HAHAHAHAHA!!!
Don’t count too much on this guy!
Please, check his announcements and the press releases at the webpage of WMO!