WMO Secretary-General Warns Against Climate ‘Doomsters and Extremists’

A bit of refreshing news, via The GWPF:
Petteri Taalas, Secretary-General of the World Meteorological Organization (WMO)

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.” 

Advertisements

133 thoughts on “WMO Secretary-General Warns Against Climate ‘Doomsters and Extremists’

  1. Refreshing news indeed. I wonder from where the next such common sense news will come. I would like to think the IPCC, perhaps.

      • 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)

        • 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….

  2. 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.

    • 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

      • 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!

    • 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 . . . !” 😉

  3. 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 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. …

    • 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.

  4. 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.

  5. 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.

      • 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.

      • 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.

      • 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/

    • Don’t count too much on this guy!

      Please, check his announcements and the press releases at the webpage of WMO!

  6. 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.

      • 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.

  7. 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.

  8. 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

  9. 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)

      • 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.

    • 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.

    • 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…

    • 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.

  10. 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.

  11. If you have access to the BBC News App you tend to get used to alarmism on steroids.

    However, today there is an excellent analysis based on real data, entitled ‘Are forest fires as bad as they seem?’ by ‘The Reality Check Team’.

    It shows data for fires from Siberia, through central Africa to the Amazon and concludes that they are nothing exceptional. That’s my wording, because they don’t actually draw a conclusion, but the data, coupled with comments by specialists lead inescapably to that conclusion.

    Who’d have thought it. Full marks to The Reality Check Team!

    • Link: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-49515462
      Are forest fires as bad as they seem?
      By Reality Check team
      BBC News

      From the article:
      “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.

    • 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.

  12. 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.

  13. 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.

    They are doomsters and extremists; they make threats.

    HAHAHAHAHA!!!

  14. Do not believe a word he says. As a Finn I can tell you that our own Petteri has been one of worst of alarmists. I think he and his ilk fears Extinction Rebellion and other loonies may cause damage to their great plan, what ever that may be. Mr Turncoat, pfft.

    • Timo V, sometimes I feel that if important people speak the truth, they are shown as uneducated or silly, or in bed with the oil companies… hopefully he has changed and fully realised that speaking the truth is a good thing that can actually help people, as the scare tactics are destroying peoples lives.

  15. As a Finn I’m moderately surprised to see THAT coming from Taalas of all people… But if he really is serious about it, I’m happy!

    • JR, do you have a signature to this newspaper and can provide us a translated copy? I like to read from the original. Best Regards

  16. It’s always refreshing to hear someone with good sense. I have to congratulate Petteri Taalas for such an effort. However, throughout the years, others tried and failed and endanger themselves on becoming pariahs in the climate community. I remember that the unsuspicious Dr. Vicky Pope, about ten of years ago, made the same effort (she is, in general, aligned with the CAGW idea). Unfortunately this is not news for the masses and only a few will hear about it, mostly the ones that read this excellent blog.

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2009/feb/11/climate-change-science-pope

    I remember that a few years ago, after a few lines that I gave in public about, precisely, the danger of extreme alarmism in climate science (or in any other branch of science), I quickly entered a list, from a guy called Jim Prall, labeled as a dangerous scientist considering climate science…

  17. Self-preservation. People eventually turn off, tune out from prophecies of the end is nigh. Duck dynasties and a gay old time for everyone!

  18. In future news:
    “WMO General Secretary Petteri Taalas has been removed from office and reassigned to a weather station in Siberia, after it emerged that he is in fact an evil denier in the pay of the fossil fuel industry.”

    • The factions are not so clearly delineated. A part or whole of the hydrocarbon industry is on board with government benefits transfer that are clean, green, and renewable.

  19. It was a good gig, once, that netted billions, and promised trillions, for the Green Blight and its environmentalist lobbies. They inferred from a mechanism characterized in isolation to liberal proportions. They asserted models (i.e. hypotheses) that have demonstrated no skill to match past observations or forecast future evolution (i.e. chaos) are fit to purpose and justify their conception of social and economic “progress” (e.g. redistributive change, population control schemes). Their works are not viable in a social or scientific context outside of their minority followers, and, perhaps, dependents. People are not so green, and have chosen to deny their prophecies, and, increasingly their Profits (sic) and profits.

  20. Is there anyone here with a signature to the original newspaper that can provide a complete english translation or conversion? As much as I respect GWPF, I always like to read the source.

  21. There should be English language media coverage on this, besides GWPF. Many of the alarmists immediately write off anything that comes from GWPF. With something in NYT , WaPO, or similar, it would be easy to post it, letter to the editor in local paper or whatever, to get the activists to take note.
    Without that, there is no real effect from these statements. The people that need to see it won’t.
    Also note that this article is from 3 months ago! So any hope of getting mainstream coverage is effectively gone.

  22. The media simply doesn’t ask the right questions when these people are interviewed.

    They don’t ask the right questions to the skeptics or the alarmists. Maybe this is because the general public doesn’t understand the science.

    One thing is I have never heard “global warming” defined in media. They use the term and never define it. What is is the sensitivity of co2 to temperature that we consider to be “global warming” ? How on earth can you debate anything without first defining the terms ?

    There are too many extremists on both sides being put on TV. I would much rather hear from the center.

  23. Well it does seem encouraging on the face of it,shame he didn’t do a bit more science,shame he didn’t mention the media scaremongering on “heat waves” there was no heat wave that lived up to Wmo standard definition.
    The damage is done ,a whole generation of kids brainwashed, legislation whole rafts of it from power generation to farming ,all based on the lie of c02 driving the climate,I fear for this guys job.

  24. Sent this to the news desk at The (Glasgow) Herald.
    Not holding my breath that they will pick up on it.

  25. The reality is that there is no climate emergency. Climate change has been going on for eons long before mankind started to make use of fossil fuels. Climate change is taking place so slowly that it takes networks of sophisticated sensors, decades to even detect it. We must be careful not to mix up weather cycles which are part of the current global climate with true climate change. Based on the paleoclimate record and the work done with models, the climate change we are experiencing is caused by the sun and the oceans over which mankind has no control. Despite the hype, there is no real evidence that CO2 has any effect on climate and there is plenty of scientific rationale to support the idea that the climate sensitivity of CO2 is zero. So even if mankind stopped making use of fossil fuels altogether, the effort would have no effect on climate change. Even if mankind could somehow stop the Earth’s climate from changing, extreme weather events would continue because they are part of the current climate so there is nothing to be gained. Rather than trashing the economy in the name of reducing CO2 emissions, we would be better off if efforts were concentrated on improving the global economy so that mankind would have an improved capability of dealing with the ravages of extreme weather events.

  26. I have been a critic about this for some time but may have just discovered the basis of what has been going on in Sigma Xi for over a decade. Probably my own fault for not being an active member, but wonder how this happened. This came from a Sigma Xi blog on their recent concern with “Ethics,” and how members needed to take a pledge. Someone said wait a minute about {insert clarifying adjectives}, which led to this being exposed. There is hope of reality intruding. Maybe it was not a conspiracy, but certainly like-minded cooperation.

    The pledge—-
    “Do you hereby pledge yourself, in accordance with the {insert clarifying adjectives} purposes and objectives of Sigma Xi, The Scientific Research Honor Society, to encourage original investigations in science, to foster companionship and cooperation among scientists, to maintain honor, integrity and honesty in all scientific activities, and to assume the other {insert more clarifying adjectives} continuing responsibilities of membership?”

    https://www.sigmaxi.org/about/value-of-membership
    1. The pursuit of excellence along with equally passionate colleagues
    2. The chance to “pay forward” to our profession through a career of
    Active encouragement of, and participation in, research
    Maintaining this community of excellence
    3. The ability to voice concerns and offer direction with informed evidence on critically important issues nationally and beyond, and
    4. The opportunity to “pay back” for your gratifying career through mentorship and support of our profession

    Partnerships with National Organizations
    AAAS, AAU, APLU, CGS, National Academies
    AAAS Science and Human Right Coalition
    UN-Sigma Xi Climate Change Report

    The 2007 report.
    https://www.sigmaxi.org/docs/default-source/Programs-Documents/Critical-Issues-in-Science/download-the-full-report-of-confronting-climate-change-(15mb-164-pages).pdf?sfvrsn=1ae3ad58_0
    In Recommendation 6–“There is a need for downscaling of climate-change scenarios to relevant regional spatial and temporal scales and a “one-stop warehouse” where these can be accessed by non-experts who can apply them to their regional planning processes.

    • Regarding Sigma Xi: We have recently been uninndated with fat ‘gift’ containing fundraising packages fro large charities. The only source for us getting on such mailing lists (cancer, heart & stroke, and nature conserving, etc) is a recent subscription to their magazine, American Science.

      Has anyone else had similar experiences?

      • Have not heard of that, but no surprise as they have a relatively new editor, and the society has been getting into the fad of the day/month/year like March for Science, environmental justice, etc. They were clearly into politics sending free subscriptions only to high schools where legislatures were considering vaccines, climate change and one other that does not come to mind. I have written them at least three times as this violates the society’s constitution, only response was from their communication director, who tried to worm out of it.

        American Scientist still has good articles including one on the Flint water problem where the author realized he was getting into a different territory, unlike their position on climate. The Sigma Xi administration clearly thinks science needs to “run things” and has apparently been tied up into national and international politics for some time, not sure how open that has been to members. They are pushing communication and ethics as in– https://www.sigmaxi.org/news/keyed-in/post/keyed-in/2019/08/28/overcoming-politics-and-misconduct-to-build-public-trust-in-science

        • As an interesting side note, the prolific author Henry Petroski, who writes a good article for American Scientist every month, has this book which I have not seen.
          [Petroski, Henry. 2010. The essential engineer : why science alone will not solve our global problems . New York : Alfred A. Knopf.] As an engineer he sometimes necessarily gets into politics, but does it properly, at least from what I (and engineer friends) have read.

  27. This secretary general I suspect, has been told to cool the masses, by who IPCC,un, ? As the church disciples of global warming have taken alarmism to hysterical heights,there in danger of losing what public support they have,this is a planned damage limitation exercise,lord Monckton last week did a article here about a university that has a department dedicated to climate denialists, they will be watching here as well as many other places,they know the damage and the opposing view is growing, the BBC have cooled down on climate alarmism the last few weeks,and the above is the reason why,plus there being taken to court over there biased left wing reporting,in effect breaking there charter, until the debate becomes public ,a opposing view is given as much coverage as the global warming alarmism then I will remain skeptical of token offers to cool down the masses,I hope I’m wrong,

  28. I think he is seeing the same problems arising as the Democrats do in the US. The Party let the Socialists have a platform in 2016, showing a degree of respect to Bernie Sanders. They did this, of course, for their money and their votes. But the extremists now get all the media attention, and suck all the air out of the room. There is no way for the moderates to be heard, and the screamers are trying to outdo each other with their far-left positions. And what Pelosi, et al, have discovered: they cannot be controlled or reasoned with. A moderate Democrat today will be destroyed by the viciousness of the far-left Democrats more than by Republicans. The Democrats have unleashed a force that is consuming them.

    There is an obvious parallel in global warming. The extremists have all but taken over. The ideas they are advocating range from the absurd to the abhorrent. Give up meat. Quit driving cars. Make do with unreliable power. Destroy the economy. Promote more third-world abortions. Cannibalism. The predictions are equally risible. By now, millions should have died, cities flooded, tens of millions of refugees, ice caps gone, and more hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, etc. The Michael Manns of the world encouraged such fear-mongering, and have now lost control. The Extinction Rebellion has created more ‘skeptics’ than ever. The perception is growing that those pushing climate fears are all nutters, trying to destroy Western civilization.

    When the dust settles, there may be little left of the Democratic Party (at least, nationally), and no credibility given to climate change fears. And the world will be a better place.

  29. Extreme left creates a lot of good straw-mans to shoot down. Media coverage of climate change topics is so crazy that people will reject it. That may result in rejecting the whole climate change, which is what Dr Taalas is worried about.

  30. Petteri Taalas is main a stream climatologist no doubt that. But it is hard to live in Finland if you don’t have some common sense. If your god has said that true believers go bare foot and then come the Finnish Winter and he say “Put on warm shoes” you believe him. Key word is common sense.

  31. I guess at some point they have to back down from the rhetoric a bit. Especially because how crazy the talk has become. Politicians and activists are competing with each other in who can say the most hysterical thing in order to gain attention and votes. Future generations will look back and wonder at the craziness of early 21st century, just like we look back and wonder at the craziness of previous centuries.

    “The world will end in 50 years!!”

    “No, we only have 12 years remaining!”

    “No, fool, it’s 10 years now!”

    “What, can’t you see? It’s going to be destroyed in 11 months!”

    “Idiots! The world will explode tomorrow if you don’t immediately commit economic suicide and give me 1 000 000 dollars!”

    Meanwhile these same people fly and drive regularly, eat expensive food, live in modern comfortable houses… Yeah, it’s kinda hard to take the whole climate change discussion seriously. Hopefully this means that atleast a little bit of sanity will return to the discussion.

  32. 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.

    On 1 August 2019, Petteri Taalas was quoted in a WMO press release saying time is running out and that urgent climate action is required – I wonder what he really thinks?:
    //
    “July has re-written climate history, with dozens of new temperature records at local, national and global level,” said WMO Secretary-General Petteri Taalas.

    “The extraordinary heat was accompanied by dramatic ice melt in Greenland, in the Arctic and on European glaciers. Unprecedented wildfires raged in the Arctic for the second consecutive month, devastating once pristine forests which used to absorb carbon dioxide and instead turning them into fiery sources of greenhouse gases. This is not science fiction. It is the reality of climate change. It is happening now and it will worsen in the future without urgent climate action,” Mr Taalas said.

    “WMO expects that 2019 will be in the five top warmest years on record, and that 2015-2019 will be the warmest of any equivalent five-year period on record. Time is running out to reign in dangerous temperature increases with multiple impacts on our planet,” he said.

    https://public.wmo.int/en/media/news/july-matched-and-maybe-broke-record-hottest-month-analysis-began
    //

  33. “it’s high time they put some professional distance between themselves and radical greens”

    Radical greens = Screaming Meme-ies

  34. Actually, Mr. Taalas spoke in the article also about CC being a kind of a religion to many people. People stare at certain paragraphs in the IPCC report just like some extreme religious people refer to bible verses.

    It is this extreme religion-like thing Mr. Taalas no longer approves, although he has been spokesman to it. According to his interviews in finnish press CO2 stays in the atmosphere 10000 years, Gulf of Mexico has warmed up by man, his colleague has said that we have 12 years left etc.

    Instead he recommends now “stay calm and carry on” in the climate fight. In religious terms it is “labora et ora, work and prey. So do not have doubts about the CC, put your neck down and prey for the best and do your part to prevent the disaster.

    To me Mr. Taalas comment sounds a lot like a religion.

  35. Petteri Taalas is a Finn. The Finns belong to the most honest people and Finland is one of the least corrupt country in the world. So no wonder that he doesn’t go with the alarmists and warns of extremism because there is still absolutely no proof for anthropogene climate change. It’s in the character of the finns to be honest. It’s good that he is the general-secretary at the wmo. With him there is hope that the climate data are not faked and manipulated.
    By the way also finnish scientists from the university of Turku in Finland deny the theory of the man-made climate change. So do scientists from the university in Kobe, Japan.
    But I fear that is doesn’t help a lot. The climate sect will continue to spread the panic under the people and aren’t ready to admit that they are wrong.

Comments are closed.