And now it’s time for Children’s Hour

By Christopher Monckton of Brenchley

Hello, children! Are you all sitting comfortably? Then I’ll begin.

Greta, dear, do wipe that nasty, frowning sneer off your face. If the wind blows on it, you’ll look like that for the rest of your life, and that wouldn’t be very nice, now, would it?

clip_image002

Once upon a time, some very naughty grown-ups made up a wicked story to frighten all you little ones with. They said it was going to get hotter and hotter and hotter. It was going to be ever so hot. Really, really hot. Yes, Alexandria, hotter even than Brad Pitt, if that’s possible.

But, you see, children, you can’t always believe what grown-ups say. Part of growing up is learning to work out when you are being told the truth and when you are not.

So today, children, I’m going to have to tell you that quite a lot of what dear old Ms Snorkel, your science teacher, has been telling you about global warming turns out not to be true. Not true at all. Dear me, no.

You see, Miss Snorkel thinks that just because someone says something dreadful is going to happen, then it’s going to happen. Just like that.

But just because someone says they think something bad is going to happen, that doesn’t mean it’s going to happen. It might not happen. So you mustn’t just believe it’s going to happen. You must check what you are told. Don’t just believe it.

Miss Snorkel has told you the experts say the weather is going to get a whole lot warmer. So I’ve drawn a nice picture for you, so that you can see whether they’re right.

clip_image004

Observed warming (HadCRUT4: dark green cursor) due to 2.49 W m–2 net anthropogenic forcing from 1850-2011 (lower scale: IPCC 2013, figure SPM.5) scaled to 3.45 W m–2 2xCO2 forcing (Coupled Model Intercomparison Project, CMIP5: upper scale: Andrews 2012). The 3.35 K CMIP5 (red cursor) and 4.05 K CMIP6 (purple cursor) midrange Charney sensitivities imply 2.4 K and 2.9 K transient warming from 1850-2011, three or four times the observed 0.75 K and almost thrice the 1 K period equilibrium warming expected from net forcing and radiative imbalance to 2011 (orange cursor). Revised projections (green) accord with observation and expectation.

Deary me, it really doesn’t look as though the experts Mrs Snorkel trusts were right about how much warmer the weather was going to be. My oh my, they seem to have overshot quite a bit, don’t they?

The very first question you should ask when grown-ups like Ms Snorkel tell you the world is going to get hotter is this. In the nicest and perfectest of all possible worlds, what would be the ideal temperature for all the cuddly creatures and pretty trees and flowers?

Has Ms Snorkel told you what that magic, ideal temperature would be? No, I didn’t think so. But look at it this way. If she hasn’t told you that, how can she know that warmer worldwide weather would be a bad thing?

Yes, Greta, dear? What about the cuddly polar bears? Won’t all that melting ice mean they have nowhere to live? Here’s another picture for you.

clip_image006

Lots and lots of lovely polar bears! Isn’t that nice, children?

clip_image008

By now, kiddiwinks, you’ll be wondering why all those experts got it so wrong. Well, here’s the thing. They made some big mistakes. Yes, Greta, I’m saying they screwed up, but we don’t use language like that in class.

There’s that face again, Greta. Just relax. Yes, of course, I’ll tell you what they got wrong.

You see, they forgot the Sun was shining. But if you look out of the window you can see for yourself that it is. Yes, I know it seems strange that they forgot the Sun was shining, but that’s exactly what they did. Silly of them, wasn’t it?

Yes, Greta, there are “feedback loops”. But that doesn’t mean the feedback loops will make the climate run away to a “tipping point”. What it does mean is that the feedbacks don’t just respond to warmer weather caused by the fact that there are greenhouse gases in the air. They have to respond to the fact that the Sun is shining. Not much choice about it.

But the experts more or less completely forgot about the feedback response to the sunshine. They made the mistake of counting it as part of the feedback response to greenhouse gases. And that made them think there would be a whole lot more warming from greenhouse gases than anyone sensible would ever expect.

How do I know? Well, here’s another picture. What it shows is that if there were 4 K global warming, which the experts now predict, the feedbacks would have to make 350 times as much more warming for each degree of greenhouse-gas warming than they did for each degree of the emission temperature that would keep the Earth warm even if there were no greenhouse gases and no feedback loops. And they can’t do that. It’s impossible.

Here’s a picture to show you how silly the experts are.

clip_image010

Unit-feedback-response ratios clip_image012 for Charney sensitivities on [1.0,4.05] K and emission temperatures of 255.6 K (IPCC 1990) and 274 K (Lindzen 1994). The CMIP5 3.35 K and CMIP6 4.05 K midrange Charney sensitivity estimates (solid yellow) imply, per impossibile, that the unit-feedback-response ratio clip_image012[1] is 80 or even 350.

Why are there two curves on the graph? That’s an excellent question, Nancy. The reason is that no one quite knows how big the emission temperature would be without any greenhouse gases or feedbacks.

But the trouble with the official figure of about 255 K is that the experts calculate it by imagining that the Earth is flat. Then they divide the sunshine by a kludge-factor of 4 in a clumsy attempt to adjust their sums for the fact that the Earth is round. Not very clever, are they, acting as though the Earth was flat?

But that’s not the only mistake they make when they try to calculate emission temperature. They calculate it by imagining there would be clouds in the air, just as there are today, reflecting almost a third of that lovely sunshine harmlessly straight back into space.

But clouds are made of water vapour, and water vapour is a greenhouse gas, and it is only in the air because of feedbacks. But at emission temperature there would be no water vapour in the air and no feedbacks. Oops! Aren’t the experts silly, children?

No, Greta, I’m not an expert. But Professor Richard Lindzen is. He’s the very expertest of all the experts. And here’s what he says about it:

“In considering an atmosphere without greenhouse substances (in order to get 255 K), clouds are retained for their visible reflectivity while ignored for their infrared properties. More logically, one might assume that the elimination of water would also lead to the absence of clouds, leading to a temperature of about 274 K rather than 255 K.”

If the Earth is not flat, and if the emission temperature is really 274 K and not 255 K, then the natural greenhouse effect, which the experts think is 32 K, is really only 13 K. And, since the Sun is shining even though the experts pretend it isn’t, most of that “natural greenhouse effect” is actually the feedback response to the sunshine and not to the greenhouse gases.

And that’s not all that the experts got wrong. You see, children, you can’t just spend, spend, spend without working out whether what you spend is going to make any difference. So the experts did their sums and worked out that the only way it would be worthwhile to spend any money on making global warming go away was to pretend there was a 1 in 10 chance the world would come to an end by 2100 because of global warming.

Yes, Greta, that’s what they pretended. You can look up Dietz et al. 2007 after class. That’s where they admitted they had pretended that global warming might end the world by 2100.

The truth is that there’s no chance the world will come to an end by 2100 because of global warming. After correcting all the experts’ scientific mistakes, there will only be about 1 K of global warming this century, and sea level will rise by about 4 inches, and the world will carry on spinning much as it does now, even if we do absolutely nothing at all to make global warming go away.

Well, that’s all we have time for today, children. But don’t worry, Greta: your future will be a rosy one. The world will be a little warmer, but that’s a very good thing, not a very bad thing. Now, stop worrying about the weather, go out and play, and enjoy the sunshine!

Advertisements

195 thoughts on “And now it’s time for Children’s Hour

  1. I feel sorry for Greta. She’s a cognitively damaged adolescent who’s being manipulated and abused by very wicked people.

    • I don’t to be honest.

      While I will be one of the first to claim that children, due to lack of experience and training, are more useless than graduates and that graduates should never be left unsupervised or allowed to play with sharp objects, people also need to remember that children still have free will.

      Yes, their experience base that can be used to support their decision process is so small it may as well be negative, but children are still capable of making their own decisions. If they should then be judged responsible for actions resulting from those decisions is an open question. To me responsibility for one’s actions is the benchmark of adulthood but we digress.

      My point is Greta still nominally has free will. This is a path she has selected for herself and ‘How Dare You’ aside, she shows a lot of evidence that she has embraced this role.

      So for me I have an irrational teenager ranting and, without actually explaining why, declaring that everything I am doing is wrong and how I must tear down my civilisation.

      Sorry Nordic Thanos, but HOW DARE YOU! Ranting about an IPCC report you clearly haven’t yourself read is not proof. Telling me I am not doing enough is not a solution. As far as my free will decision goes you are threatening the way of life of myself, my family and my future. How Dare You!

      Greta had my sympathy right up until she started to demand my compliance. If she decides to start discussing concerns I may change my view, but until then she can go jump.

      • And isn’t the Green New Deal supposed to be the climate solution they demand? The core of the GND is only supposed to cost $93 Trillion over ten years! That’s $65,000 per household each year, or $650,000 per household over ten years!

        That’s the good news!

        The bad news is that a broad analysis of the GND indicates a total cost of $200 Trillion over ten years, along with 75,000,000 jobs lost!!

        I’m betting my job is one of ’em, and so is yours!

        So with the complete de-industrialization of the US, why bother to work? There won’t be anything worthwhile to buy and no money to buy it with. There’d be no reason to get up each morning! No family to feed, no kids to raise, no job to drive… err, walk to!

        Maybe that’s the end of the world AOC promises in 10 or 12 years! Her prediction does coincide with completion of the Green New Dead….err, Deal!

      • I misheard Sir David Attenborough on the radio this morning when he was eulagising her, and thought he called her Greta Humbug. Um? That goes along with her being dressed like Wednesday Adams or Pippi Longstocking.
        I feel the poor girl is being manipulated by adults for nefarious purposes, and should be back at school learning some science (not climate!) and maths, and be allowed to enjoy her childhood.
        Although now she is of an age that used to be called the terrible teens, when behaviour is based more on emotion than rational thinking:
        urmc.rochester.edu/encyclopedia/content.aspx?Content types=1&ContentID=3051
        This is not an addressee him but a criticism of those who abuse a child’s childhood by making her fearful and angry.
        If they have something to say then it should be said by an adult.

        • “…thought he called her Greta Humbug. Um? That goes along with her being dressed like Wednesday Adams or Pippi Longstocking.”

          I heard some very insensitive people calling her, “Scoldilocks” and I told them it wasn’t nice no matter how funny it was but they wouldn’t listen. No, they wouldn’t listen at all.

      • Your comment reminds me of something a history professor said about some country – Iran? – after they had a revolution: “….and this is why graduate students should never be allowed to make policy.”

      • For what it’s worth, the Catholic Church considers seven years old to be the “age of reason”, where you are morally culpable for your actions.

      • Here is an expanded version….
        Looky Here! Child Actress Greta Thunberg!….SUCKERS!!!!!!
        Greta Thunberg
        Actress | Miscellaneous Crew
        https://www.imdb.com/name/nm10361418/?ref_=fn_al_nm_3

        Greta Thunberg was born on January 3, 2003 in Sweden as Greta Tintin Eleonora Ernman Thunberg. She is known for her work on Ave paraíso (2019), Climate Change: The Facts (2019) and Heti Dörgés Villám Gézával (2019). See full bio »
        Born: January 3, 2003 in Sweden
        1 video »

        https://www.imdb.com/video/imdb/vi2610741017?playlistId=nm10361418&ref_=nm_ov_vi

        Known For:
        Ave paraíso
        Actress
        (2019)
        Climate Change: The Facts
        Herself – Climate Activist
        (2019)
        Heti Dörgés Villám Gézával
        Herself
        (2019)
        ITV News at Ten
        Miscellaneous Crew

        Filmography
        Jump to: Actress | Miscellaneous Crew | Self | Archive footage
        Hide HideActress (1 credit)
        2019 Ave paraíso (Short) (voice)
        Show ShowMiscellaneous Crew (1 credit)
        Show ShowSelf (17 credits)
        Show ShowArchive footage (9 credits)

        Related Videos
        Climate Change: The Facts — David Attenborough takes a stark look at the facts surrounding climate change in today’s world, detailing the dangers we are already having to deal with and future threats, but also the possibilities for prevention and radical political, social and cultural change.

        Personal Quote: [to the U.N. Global Climate Action Summit, September 2019] You have stolen my dreams and my childhood with your empty words… People are suffering, people are dying, entire ecosystems are collapsing. We are at the beginning of a mass extinction and all you can talk about is money and fairy tales of an endless economic growth. How dare you! See more »
        Trivia: Granddaughter of Olof Thunberg and daughter of Malena Ernman & Svante Thunberg.

        Pull off the MASK, and…..

        https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-CE3UjxewJXY/XYoRYzBOpDI/AAAAAAACALA/uvmCvmYnB9Q1pbLlIfnaaLYt8BnGYj71ACLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/tumblr_516fe4b45479775dabfaa5f647f7211f_5c28077b_640.png

      • In the beginning I thought she was sincere, but after seeing her speech at the UN I changed my mind. She seems to be trying to work herself up into a rage and failing. A very bad performance indeed.

    • It’s the mission of gurus to cognitively damage you, rob you of yr precious self-possession , as per Messrs George Soros, Al Gore, Doctors Edward Bernays and Joseph G**bells, Chairman Mao and his down- the- memory -whole Cultural Revolution indoctrinating youth to dob in on their parents, and professors. – it goes wa-aay back, even to Plato, the philosopher king and his ‘noble’ because ‘necessary’ lie.

    • Craig, I didn’t felt quite like you do about Greta until I read this from a mother with a child with Aspergers. Now, I feel angry that they are using and abusing this poor child. She really can’t help it.

      Thread offers devastating insight into why the Left’s weaponization of Greta Thunberg is particularly egregious
      http://bit.ly/2mWK86v

      • This is exactly what I have said about her situation numerous times.
        I did not have to have a kid with the condition to know it.
        In fact, it would be just as wrong for any parent to do this to any kid.
        The job of raising kids , done properly, is the opposite of scaring them to death every single day.

        As an aside, I am not at all sure she has any such condition.
        I have watched several interviews she has done on morning shows and such, meeting people like Arnold Schwarzenegger, among others.
        She appears to me to have a normal range of emotions, which of course vary hugely from one person to another to begin with.
        In fact most teens would be unable to meet some famous person while on TV and keep up a bantering mood and a sly smile on their face.
        After seeing her and carefully considering her micro-expressions and comparing that to authoritative descriptions of how people with various conditions on “The Spectrum” are supposed to be different, I have concluded she does not act or seem at all like what is described in the literature.
        I would not be a bit surprised if she has any mental condition to the same degree she can see CO2.

  2. CLOUDS,CLOUDS,CLOUDS.
    The IPCC is very cloudy on clouds , in fact they dont worry about them .
    Every day and night , clouds have more affect on our temperature than wind,sun or sea temps .
    A cloudy day will be cooler , a cloudy night will be warmer .
    A cloudless day will be warmer , a cloudless night will be cooler .
    The temps will vary anything from 5/10c to 20/40c in different areas depending on cloud .
    Einstein or Yogi bear might suggest we should look at world wide cloud coverage .
    The IPCC suggests we look at all that CO2 we are emitting .

      • Did you read the article at that link?

        Basically;

        “Other gross model simplifications include

        # Ignorance about large and small-scale ocean dynamics

        # A complete lack of meaningful representations of aerosol changes that generate clouds.”

        Yes, it talks of clouds and models but not in a good way, just underlines the fact models simply are not fit for purpose especially when we are talking about global energy and economic policy.

        • ttps://quadrant.org.au/opinion/doomed-planet/2019/09/a-climate-modeller-spills-the-beans/

          ‘I’ve looked at clouds from both sides now,
          From up and down and still somehow
          It’s clouds’ illusions I recall,
          I really don’t know clouds at all.’

          H/t Cli-sci modellers in cloud towers.

    • In considering clouds. clouds, clouds, let us not forget to consider humidity, humidity, humidity.
      Because you see, it is true that a cloudless day will be warmer than a cloudy one, and a cloudy night will be warmer than a cloudy one…all other things being equal.
      But what we need to know very often, is how much warmer a cloudless day will be.
      And to get an answer to that question, we need to know how humid the air is.
      A humid day will not be as hot as a day with low humidity (I am referring to the absolute rather than relative humidity. IOW, the dew point of the air), and a humid night will not be as cool as a night with low humidity.
      Generally speaking, every night the air will cool to the dew point.
      And it is very important to know that this temperature will be reached well before dawn.
      And it is very important to realize the significance of this basic observable fact.
      What it means is that the atmosphere has plenty of extra built in cooling capacity.
      If for some reason one day is hotter than the previous one, and all else is equal, it will wind up just as cool by dawn of the following day.
      The atmosphere will not have any chance of runaway warming, where one warm day leads to the next day being warmer, if the dew point temperature remains the same. Put another way, if the whole atmosphere keeps the same amount of moisture in it, the temperature will not vary by much. It will not get much hotter, or cooler…all else being the same.
      And if there is more moisture in the air over time, this will cause it to be less warm during the day, and less cool just prior to dawn.
      IOW…a warmer world will have more humidity in the air, and the temperature will be milder.
      Not as hot by day, not as cool by night.
      And if there is anything that plants like, it is humid weather than is not too hot by day, and warm overnight.
      The only thing plants like more than that is if there is also plenty of nutrients for the plant to use for growth, and the primary plant nutrient is CO2.
      Happy plants mean more and bigger plants.
      More and bigger plants mean a more robust biosphere…being that plants are at the base of the entire food chain of the biosphere (particularly if we are to use the term to mean any and all photosynthesizing organisms).

      All of this is why no one has or can explain how it is that the Earth is greener, crop yields are way up and rising, in a world which is warmer and has more CO2 in the air and ocean than when it was cooler with less CO2.
      It is beyond odd that anyone can suppose that although the world is greener and the base of the biosphere’s food chain is thus more robust and abundant, that this is somehow a precursor to imminent catastrophe and the end of the world.
      Anyone who thinks this is misinformed or miseducated or a fool.
      Anyone who says this and is not misinformed, miseducated, or a fool, is a liar.
      There are no other possibilities.

      • One more (doh!):
        “…no one has or can explain how it is some sort of a crisis that the Earth is greener…”

      • Thanks for this great humidity argument.

        Funny question: is overnight cooling at all part of IPCC “modeling”?
        If not, than AGW acolytes are also flat-earth believers 🙂

        Simply Argument for children could be: without greenhouse gases weather would be like on the moon: up to +130 at day and +170 at night. Greenhouse effect works like a coat on a body, it limits the extremities and eventually moves average slightly up, which is no problem. So more CO2 means milder, livable world. Discussion is over, the truth is settled, go play around and have fun.

      • Thanks N.McGinley ,so humidity is a factor as well as clouds .
        Both being water based , where does CO2 affect their composition .
        It appears clouds and also humidity directly affect air and land or sea surface temp to a very large degree .
        How does CO2 fit into the equation?
        Thats what the IPCC and Greta are concerned about .

        • Early 20th century warming was virtually indistinguishable from late 20th century warming, and since then the temp has been mostly flat, with a couple of excursions caused by el nino ocean cycles.
          There is no time scale at which increasing CO2 can be seen to lead to higher air temperatures for the planet. Simply put, the historical temperature data does not correlate with the CO2 concentration, not including the highly problematic adjustments to the original historical time series of temperature.

          References for the above assertions can be found in the following links.
          The first is at about 35:29 in this lecture given by Professor Richard Lindzen, atmospheric physicist with a long career at MIT:
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=so3ELA7NpVw&t=1786s
          I encourage giving the whole thing a watch for anyone who has never seen it.

          The second is to an article on this site, written by Professor Robert Brown of Duke University and Werner Brozek. The very long comment thread is likewise worth the time to read it again, even if you read or participated in it at the time.
          The subject is the correlation, discovered by Tony Heller, between the sum of the temperature adjustments, and the CO2 concentration of the air as it has increased over time.
          The correlation is near perfect, R squared of ~ .99, proving that the adjustments are made using an algorithm which is forcing the historical data to correlate with increasing CO2.
          https://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/08/14/problematic-adjustments-and-divergences-now-includes-june-data/

          This third one is a recent posting from Tony Heller updating and reconfirming the troublesome finding that the tampering with historical temperature data has corrupted the time series to match increasing CO2:

          https://realclimatescience.com/2019/09/new-video-rewriting-americas-history/

          This finding made by Tony Heller is pertaining to the US records, but it can be shown rather easily that the same process has been carried out on other data sets of a global nature.
          Warmistas maintain that each of the adjustments is justified and correct, but this cannot disguise the fact that when they are all added it up, it just so happens that the sum of them perfectly matches increasing CO2 in the air.
          Not that those of us paying close attention over the years needed more proof, but these adjustments are the smoking gun of corruption in the climate science business.

    • That”s for sure. See what climate modeler Dr Nakamura has to say about clouds:

      https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/doomed-planet/2019/09/a-climate-modeller-spills-the-beans/

      “Accurate simulation of cloud is simply impossible in climate models since it requires calculations of processes at scales smaller than 1mm.” Instead, the modellers put in their own cloud parameters. Anyone studying real cloud formation and then the treatment in climate models would be “flabbergasted by the perfunctory treatment of clouds in the models.”

      • “Anyone studying real cloud formation and then the treatment in climate models would be “flabbergasted by the perfunctory treatment of clouds in the models.”

        And the Alarmists want us to spend TRILLIONS of dollars to reduce CO2 based on something as flimsy as the Global Climate Models, that can’t even model clouds, the most important factor of the Earth’s climate.

  3. It rather looks as if the wind did change and blow on Greta’s face, because that expression has been fixed on Greta Thunderbird for a very long while now. I hope that she listens to Uncle Christopher.

    • My impression is that she has lately and rather suddenly put on a much more nasty, angry, and downright mean looking, face.

      • seeing as that pic was taken with some serious lighting on her..
        her pupils are suspiciously large
        so what had she taken/been given prior?

        • I suppose I would want to see the eyes of the people sitting next to her.
          Modern digital cameras can give a bright looking photo even in low light conditions.
          My phone can take an excellent picture outside at night, practically in the dark, w/ no flash.
          And that is just a phone.
          There may be something to that, and I can see what you are referring to in the picture, but it may not be what it seems.
          Besides, that does not strictly speaking have any bearing on the issues at hand.
          Lot’s of people take lots of things for any number of reasons.
          Speaking for myself, I want to keep my focus on the more immediately and obviously relevant issues, and try to steer clear of the strictly personal.
          Which is admittedly difficult, since making it highly personal is exactly what her strategists have deliberately engineered.

      • Too bad Greta’s ultimate source of funding is Gates and Soros, two of the more strident Globalists in the world!

        • True, though they made their fortunes quite differently. Gates through license fees from millions individually while Soros grabbed his through a massive currency speculation on the UK pound in trouble. They spend it differently too: Gates more in the medical field and Soros mostly political. The latter should be lawed out IMO.

          • “…Soros grabbed his through a massive currency speculation on the UK pound in trouble…

            He also abused the Australian dollar. Several years ago it got up to US$1.04. He cashed in. It hasn’t recovered yet. Today – US$0.67.

            (I know, I know – Australia has also had political problems, a Royal Commission investigating the banks, the price of iron ore dropped, and several other problems – even the Reserve Bank of Australia – but I still hold GS to blame.)

    • When Scott Adams includes a statement to children like, “You are now smarter than most adults on the topic of climate,” he reveals a massive blind spot in his observations. I love his Dilbert cartoons because they so often reflect what is observed in the real workplace but he seems not to have sat and observed in a modern school classroom.

      • Being declared smart on the topic of climate, by someone who is demonstrably dumb on the topic of climate, is not such high praise, IMO.

  4. Poor children – they were never raised in a world where nuclear weapons were going to flash-fry everyone in their sleep.
    Where schools ran practice drills, as if you could ever ‘duck and cover’ from a thermo nuclear explosion.

    These weren’t ‘stolen dreams’ – these were gifted nightmares.

    • Indeed. This is a consequence of kids being raised in a super-safe environment where they have nothing real to worry about.

      So they make up fairy stories instead. Then try to make them real.

      In no sane world would anyone be listening to this girl. But here we are.

      • To be fair, I think we should note that she did not make these stories up…she has had them pumped into her young and plastic and extremely impressionable mind day after day for her entire life.

      • They are stridently gloomy about every one of their predicted catastrophes, but even more stridently angry when it is pointed out that yet another gloomy prediction has not come to pass.
        What should we think about such people?

        • I was convinced the brown stuff would hit the fan in 1980. When Mount Saint Helens blew in 1979 I nodded to myself. But then the world didn’t end. What a drag. I had to get a Real Job. But expecting the end and avoiding work was fun while it lasted.

          What is a real drag is to hit age fifty, and some of your friends have worked thirty years and are retiring with fat pensions, as you continue working.

          Now I just tell people I took my pension when I was young and could enjoy it.

          • When I was younger I can recall several times being sure civilization was on the verge of collapse, just judging from all the crap being reported in the news.
            I can also recall, BTW, at every age people talking about how weird, wacky, unusual, and out of control the weather was at some particular point in time.
            Crazy hot in Summer, stupidly cold in Winter, endless rain in Spring, hot then cold then hot again, or vice versa, pretty much anytime…
            But mostly just regular, which is what makes excursions from average seem odd to people who are not really paying much attention most of the time.
            I think what is most likely to happen in ten or twelve years is that the vast majority of people will be somewhere between contemptuously dismissive, and actively intolerant, of doomsday cultists, just like has been the case for all of history.

    • a happy little debunker
      Yes, my existential nightmares were that I would never make it to 20 and not even live long enough to decide not to have children; the decision had been made for me. Nuclear weapons were a demonstrated reality, not an academic theory.

      • When you read at 12 years old (this is 1974) that transit time for an ICBM is like 15 minutes, it tends to focus your mind.

      • Actually, “ducking and covering” could very well save one’s life in the event of a nuclear attack. Many survivors of the nuclear bomb attacks on Japan were very close to ground zero, yet they survived because they were not directly exposed to the blast effects.

        • Maybe — depending on how far you were from the blast.

          By the time we were ducking and covering in elementary school the Soviets had hydrogen bombs and the school was less than five miles from the White House.

          • I suspect most baby boomers went through a phase of being shocked that we got through all of the years after WWII with no nuclear weapons being used in anger.
            Because most people I grew up with considered it to be very likely just a matter of time.

            Sort of like how most people who lived through 911 and the anthrax scare were pretty dang surprised, if you asked them at a certain point in time, that all these years would go by without another major terror attack on the US.

  5. Greta, some questions for you to ponder.
    1. Why is Greenland called Greenland and not West Island?
    2. What formed the Great Lakes and the Finger Lakes?
    3. What formed the Yosemite Park Valley.
    4. Why were grapes grown and wine made in Roman England?

    • Not merely Roman England but in the time of Henry IV as well. The Vale of Gloucester was a renowned grape growing region at that time.

    • And how was it the Vikings lived on Greenland and were self sufficient farmers growing grain crops, for hundreds of years, prior to being frozen out and having to abandon (we should hope) the island due to it being no longer possible to live that way in that place?
      It is still too cold by quite a bit to do what they did there.

    • > 4. Why were grapes grown and wine made in Roman England?

      O, that was easy: because according for BBC, typical ancient Brits were black, and it’s obvious truth that warm climate and existence of black people are hugely correlated.

      • To all with a Greenhouse Gas phobia or aversion please note:
        without H2O or CO2 the planet would be dead

        • ….and then there is this….

          Sign the Petition to Ban DHMO (Di-Hydrogen Monoxide) aka Hydrogen Hydroxide NOW!!!….and look how many Greenies signed the petition!!
          https://youtu.be/yi3erdgVVTw

          It’s also called hydrogen hydroxide as it forms a hydrogen ion and a hydroxide ion. To be clear, though, only a small amount is ionized in liquid (10E-7 M at pH=7). In the gas phase, hardly any at all. Most is HOH the molecule.

          • I pulled the same stunt after a climate strike in Christchurch.
            I told our little high school climate protesters I was a research scientist and had found this dangerous compound in the atmosphere.
            Really ramped it up, it was in our water-ways, on our fruit and vegetables after washing and in our drinking water.
            You wouldn’t believe how many of them were keen to start social media campaigns, petition parliament and letter bomb local politicians to limit or ban Di-Hydrogen Monoxide.
            Somewhat put out when I wrote out the composition of the compound. I had misled them and used science to confuse them. Tried to show them how much science had been used to mislead them already.
            Sad thing was that they weren’t ready to listen because the media, their teachers and UN scientist said global warming was true and and anybody who denied it was just denying well documented ‘facts’.

    • Very possibly similar to the current temperature.Here’s how a greenhous free atmosphere works as a blanket:

      Sunlight strikes the surface and warms it (i.e., the molecules of the surface gain kinetic energy)

      The surface warms the atrmosphere near the surface (i.e., the kinetic energy of the surface molecules is transfered to the molecules in the atmosphere).

      The warmer atmosphere is less dense and rises, cooling as it does so

      The result is an atmosphere that is warmer near the surface than at higher altitudes.

      Radiation escapes to space from the surface and from the atmosphere at all levels

      The resulting surface temperature is higher than the radiative temperature of the planet.

  6. Calling clouds “vapor” is poor terminology. Vapor is water in gas phase.
    Clouds are visible. Vapor is invisible.
    Clouds are aerosols, that is why they are visible in sunlight.
    Aerosols are made of microscopic particles of water in liquid or solid phase.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerosol

    Certainly, clouds also contain water in vapor phase amongst the liquid phase particles

    • The point was that if there was no vapour in the atmosphere, there would be no condensation to form clouds. So if you go back to zero GHG then you go back to zero cloud cover.

    • Either way, those forms of water absorb over 90% of the IR band that CO2 has. Also, the heat retention or insulating properties of water vapor is something like 1000 times greater than CO2.

  7. Is this greta really 16? She looks about 12 to me. Arrested development due to a syndrome? Is she a vegan with vitamin B12 deficiency?

  8. This clearly is a white, imperialistic, old-age-biased narrative, permeated by toxic-masculine intolerance, retooled into propaganda, aimed at radicalizing children worldwide. ☺

  9. Exceptional lesson, Lord Monckton!

    Yet I fear that it is an attempt to teach a Parrot a new set of squaks and whistles. &, of course, parrots have Bird Brains, so it will be some time until this particular parrot learns to repetivitively bleat out the truth. Yes, quite some time!!!

    But fear not, as the catastrophic drivel you are hearing will not come to pass anyway!!!

    • Parrots are smart birds. And they live for decades.

      Bird’s brains are smaller than humans but their neurons are said to be much more closely packed together so they can get more brainpower in a smaller space.

      Crows are smart, too. They have been shown to recognize individual humans.

      Don’t sell the birds, or other animals, short just because they have small brains. They may have a built-in compensating mechanism 🙂

  10. I would suggest that look on her face reflects the fact she is suffering from constipation, probably as a result of holding it in so she didn’t have to go in a bucket on the “speed yacht”!

  11. So what about our “”Chief Scientist t”” here in Australia telling us the truth
    about the gas CO2. What it does and what it does not do.

    And then going on air, radio and TV and saying so. Then touring the country
    and giving talks in the local town hall.

    Now as he is not doing that, what does he do for his generous salary.

    MJE

    • “Michael September 25, 2019 at 7:24 pm

      Now as he is not doing that, what does he do for his generous salary.”

      Waits for retirement.

  12. It may have been discussed elsewhere, but I have to ask. How is she back to Sweden? I recall that some folks
    where *flown* to The States to crew the “zero-emission” yacht back to Europe. Will she be on it?

    Just curious.

    • I heard she is intending to travel on to South America before heading back to Sweden.
      I wonder if she is taking that same yacht there?
      I suppose she could drive there by electric car.
      Should someone tell her that car is partly coal and nuclear powered?

      • I understand that she and her father are going to take the bus to S. America, giving lectures as they go, and then hitch a ride on a container ship back to Europe.
        I wonder how they are going to navigate the Darien Gap as I believe it is called?

    • She intends to visit Canada, then make her way to Mexico, and eventually to Argentina for COP25 in December, after which, I assume she will return to the US. Her chief means of travel will be bus and train, when possible. She refuses to fly, of course which is idiotic, but then, so is her Warmunist ideology. She won’t be returning to Sweden until next May, I believe. She hopes to be able to sail back. Failing that, I suppose a cruise ship would be another option.

  13. If the Earth is not flat, and if the emission temperature is really 274 K and not 255 K, then the natural greenhouse effect, which the experts think is 32 K, is really only 13 K.

    Once upon a time in this blog, someone told about a shiny metal object sitting on a bench. As part of its processing, it had been heated up. The problem was that, being highly reflective, it was also not radiative. That meant you couldn’t feel its heat until you actually touched it and got a nasty burn. So, its measurable effective radiative temperature was just the ambient temperature reflected off it.

    It seems to me that the higher a body’s albedo, the more doubt there is about its actual surface temperature.

    • That’s what the “emissivity” term in the Sefan-Boltzmann formula is for. Any decent IR thermometer has a setting adjustment for the emissivity of the object being measured. There are readily available references for emissivity of all sorts of materials including polished metals.🙂

      • As the emissivity of an object decreases and the emitted energy decreases, the signal to noise ratio gets worse when you try to measure the surface temperature with your IR thermometer.

        If I point my IR thermometer at a very hot mirror, do I not end up measuring my own temperature?

        I just tried the experiment on the front door mirror. With me in front of the mirror I got 73.6 F. Without me in front of the mirror, I got 70.1 F. The adjacent wall was 70.5 F. The front door, in front of the mirror, was 69.5 F.

        I assume the mirror was actually the same temperature as the adjacent wall.

        • Ooh, I have some experimentin’ to do now!
          I got me one of them laser thermometers, and just bought me a new multimeter that also has temperature probes, which I shall see if it can be used to cross check temp of surfaces (I think it is intending for liquids, but I will get back on that).
          I can do shiny cookie sheets before and after the oven, aluminum foil, and all manner of other shiny stuff.
          I got gazillions of mirrors too.

        • It is certainly true that the uncertainty of IR temperature measurements increases as the emissivity decreases. That’s because the assumed emissivity uncertainty becomes a larger relative to the actual emissivity. Note, however, that a typical mirror is glass with silver on the back. Since your IR thermometer measures in long wave IR (8-12 microns) the glass appears opaque to the instrument. The normal e for glass is about 0.80 to 0.86 .

          • Doh!

            Good point. I repeated the experiment with a relatively clean and relatively flat piece of stainless steel out in the garage. With me in front of the stainless, I got a range of temperatures around 75 F. Without me in front of the stainless, the temperatures were around 55 F.

            Without me in front of the stainless, the temperatures were quite close, certainly within 1 F.

            With me in front of the stainless, it mattered a lot how I pointed the sensor. I got one temperature as low as 70 F.

            Anyway … the original point was that, if you’re trying to measure the temperature of a shiny object with an IR thermometer, you could end up just measuring the temperature of whatever was reflecting from the object.

            I would say the first rule in instrumentation is to make sure you’re actually measuring what you think you’re measuring. It’s not as easy as it sounds.

          • Separating out reflected energy from emitted energy would seem to be a difficult exercise depending on the material.
            This was sort of what I was alluding to when I wondered if shiny metal is shiny at all wavelengths.
            We can readily perceive which objects are highly reflective of visible light, but can we assume that what is highly reflective of visible is also highly reflective in other wavelengths?
            IDK, but I am curious.
            It occurs to me that some things that look unreflective to our eye may be reflective of some other wavelength, like IR.

          • Nicholas McGinley September 27, 2019 at 2:34 pm

            … It occurs to me that some things that look unreflective to our eye may be reflective of some other wavelength, like IR.

            Certainly. The reason we see objects as colored is that they don’t reflect all visible wavelengths equally. For instance, green tree leaves and grass absorb all visible wavelengths except green, which they reflect.

            In infrared photography, living leaves and grass are very reflective. Dead plant material isn’t. link

    • Without looking at those charts for review, I think no material has emissivity equal to zero.
      Stephen Hawking told me even black holes radiate (although I am not sure he ever knew exactly what he was talking about).

  14. Why is a tiny and uncertain chance of climate catastrophe a call to immediate action, and a tiny though proven imminent chance of climate-destroying asteroid or comet impact cause to do nothing at all? Not even front military options across countries. though the space age is 50 years now and the message written in the K-T boundary decoded since 1980?

    Why is it we recognize the presence of gambler’s fallacy for infinitesimal odds right away, and yet we do not discern it in people who claim impactors are “nothing you need to worry about” based on just statistics or time elapsed? If there is imminence of a dino-killer class, does that not create a divide-by-infinity result with complete extinction that makes parents’ eyes grow wider? These brushoffs include the ever popular “People will die, but chances are it will be someone else.”

    If a city killer lands in the ocean it will drown all the cities around it. Here is an example of a letter I am sending around to people who wish they hadn’t gotten it.

  15. “The very first question you should ask when grown-ups like Ms Snorkel tell you the world is going to get hotter is” – Can you show us the CORRECT PREDICTIONS?

    Here Greta, give this URL to your “science” teacher and classmates. Watch it and memorize those 3 steps. Nowhere in there will you find the words “believer, denier, consensus, majority or 97%”.

    TTYL

  16. Christopher Monckton of Brenchley, I’d be more interested in your suit against U.C. Merced. How’s that going?

  17. The poor child has been unmercifully used by adults with political motives. It is child abuse, and Greta is not the only child victim of those perpetrators.

    I salute Lord M. for attempting to communicate with abused children, but it might be better for him to deal with the abusers — because he is not an expert in child abuse or therapies for abused children.

    Children who have been lied to, frightened, exploited, and made to suffer physical and/or emotional distress often exhibit pathologies that can stay with them long into adulthood. Treatments are various and include counselling, medications, and structured activities that are best prescribed by professionals on a case-by-case basis.

    It is doubtful that public humiliations will aid this child. It seems that such are more of the same abuse.

    The abusers need to be dealt with. My advice is to address them, and show some empathy and real concern for the victims.

    • Amen!

      As someone who has had some experience with a child (now an adult) with Asbergers, I could not agree more. Frighting any children for political purposes is reprehensible, but to do it to ones with mental issues is a heinous crime. Where is the outrage in our leaders, the public and the press?

      Not a good sign for the future of Western Civilization.

  18. Poor Greta. She will never know anything about Pelagornis sandersi, the bird with the 28-foot wingspan that had three million years and then died out. Floating along on wings more than twice the span of today’s albatross must have been quite heady for that Big Bird. I doubt she ever sees starlings in a murmuration. It’s like watching a single organism in a ballet.

    She will never know the real meaning of “environment”, as in where the geese live in the spring and summer and where they go in the fall and stay in the winter, and why they do that. She”ll never know how the sound of geese honking while they’re flying can just tug at your heart and make you want to grow wings.

    She’ll never enjoy the scent of rain coming in from the west, or hear thunder in a snowstorm. As pale as she is, she probably never goes outside for a walk in the woodlands to see fields of bluebells in the spring and swaths of white trilliums and look for May apples about to bloom. She’ll never know what it’s like to watch fireflies signaling each other in the night and maybe even catch them in a jar for a few minutes, then turn them loose, nor will she watch the clouds to see if there are dragons and whales forming in them.

    The only thing she knows about is baloney. Sad.

    • My impression as well.
      Anyone who is the outdoorsy type would, if they are observant and well travelled, have to come to the conclusion that the world is far from a death throws type crisis.
      Every place I go is very nice…the trees are green, the sky is blue, the clouds are white, the rain is wet, wildlife and plants fill the air and sky is profuse abundance…and there is not crisis to be found.
      Occasionally and here and there some adverse events occur, and sometimes theses are truly awful.
      But this has always been the case, and will forever remain the case.
      And where these bad things happen…then there is healing and regrowth and everything is, over time, restored.
      Sometimes, as with wildfires, these adverse events are a necessary prerequisite to renewal and increased vigor and health.
      All sunshine makes a desert.
      And no place blooms like a desert after a flood.

  19. Christopher wrote, “Has Ms Snorkel told you what that magic, ideal temperature would be?”

    This is a very important point! Dynamic systems, such an an internal combustion engine, have optimal ranges of operation. Too low of an RPM and the engine produces little power and gets poor gas mileage; too high and it destroys itself. The optimal range might depend on what parameter one wishes to optimize. Invariably, a car will get poor gas mileage at low speeds. The gas mileage increases rapidly, reaches a peak, and then drops off more slowly than than it rose, as the speed increases. Part of the definition of “optimum” includes where the peak gas mileage, torque, or horsepower occurs. Given that the gas mileage versus speed graph has different slopes before the peak than it does after the peak, one might decide to sacrifice a little gas mileage for a shorter driving time or better throttle response. One might also recognize that since it is impossible to maintain exactly the best speed for peak gas mileage, it is probably better to shoot for a slightly higher speed so that the average gas mileage is higher than would result from transitioning into the steeper slope area below the peak.

    What this means for climate is that there are similar trade-offs. A slightly warmer global average might cause a sea level rise that will displace people. However, if it opens up agricultural land that currently is not amenable to growing things like corn, soy, and rice, it will feed more people than the present conditions. There have been concerns expressed about excess deaths from heat waves. However, typically, more people die from cold spells. The trade-off here is fewer deaths overall if Winters are not as severe.

    What I have not seen from the doom sayers is a detailed cost-benefit analysis of the effects of warming versus ‘business as usual.’ The unstated assumption is that we have been living in the best of all possible worlds and any change can only be detrimental. I’d like to see an objective analysis to recommend what the optimal global average should be. Unstated assumptions should be avoided.

    • I am in general agreement with your comment, although I can think of some reasons why the tradeoffs between warmer and colder are not at all symmetric.
      I think warmer is decidedly more advantageous than colder.
      The evidence is written in all of history.

      “Unstated assumptions should be avoided.”
      On this point I agree totally.
      One of the more egregious among the many assumptions made by the warmistas is that we are all supposed to believe than somehow people, and in particular politicians (not the sharpest of tools in the shed) are in control of the weather or the climate.
      I think, to most of us, the mere suggestion that this is in any way true is completely ludicrous.
      Even if we accept on faith the entire premise that CO2 concentration in the air is the thermostat of the Earth, none of the so-called solutions offered and imposed by the people that who assert this premise, will or can do much of anything to control or lower CO2 production.
      They oppose nuclear, they oppose more hydroelectric dams, and now they even appear to be opposing very strenuously replacing coal or petroleum with natural gas.
      IOW, they are against any of the things which are known to be able to lower CO2 production.
      They seem to be against anything that actually works and/or does not waste vast amounts of money.

    • I think Greta’s anxiety level has increased quite a bit since that first picture was taken. Her picture at the UN was not nearly as pleasant.

      Unfortunately, Greta believes every CO2 horror story she has been told. If I believed all that garbage, I would probably be scowling like Greta, too. Fortunately for me, I know it *is* garbage, so I’m quite relaxed about the current situation.

      It’s child abuse to be scaring all these children with falsehoods about the dangers of CO2. All these scary stories are pure speculation, yet those promoting CAGW are pushing them as being confirmed. They are outright lying to the children. The head of the WMO says so. The IPCC science conclusions say so. Yet the activists continue to lie to the children and the rest of us.

      The lies are criminal and very destructive to many lives.

  20. Thank you Christopher Monckton of Brenchley! Nice layer cake crafted from wit, sarcasm and realism with some science sprinkles on top for fun.

  21. However, in my childlike innocence, I reply that there IS such a thing as climate change. You see, I live in a faraway land filled with magical creatures like rhinos and elephants (until they can be hunted into extinction) in a city called Johanna. Here the mad English planted lots of trees they brought with them, and mad scientists called metereologists said it was cooler and wetter than the surrounding areas that did not have those trees. However, we did not have a river to water those trees, so much later it was decided to cut them down because they use up too much water. However, nobody thought to consider what happened to the water they use.You see, the tree did not keep most of the water. It “sweated” the water as vapor to the air, and it fell again as rain either in Johanna or in another faraway place. Since that faraway place no longer gets that water vapour as rain (remember, the trees that made it happen were cut) I’m sure the elves and fairies that live there are complaining about it and calling it climate change. What about Johanna, you ask? No happy ending there, they are complaining of droughts and acid mine drainage rising. Oh, and before I forget,
    a long, long time ago there was a golden (actually, bronze) age that ended suddenly and catastrophically. I hear that they cut down many, many trees for fuel, smelt ores and all that; It’s a wonder how trees actually survived. In my innocence I wonder whether the trees and the downfall are connected. Sweet dreams……

  22. Speaking from memory, the Snorkmaiden also appeared in “Comet in Moominland”, another tale of global warming.

    Readers can relax. The comet missed the earth, and they all went and hid in a cave to escape the temorary heat wave.

    • Neither this post nor the one you linked to was meant to be read by or to children. The posts are meant to be condescending and to be read by adults (over 30s).

  23. Everyone born yesterday, today or tomorrow should be very, very pleased and moreover thankful for entering a world in which everything is already prepared, organized and handed over by all those billion people preceded for you.

  24. Hmmm! I think Greta does science, not fairy tales… if this was a fairy tale, bear in mind Lord M that you are the big, bad wolf…

    I suppose you are going to say you are doing the science, but to me it looks like the sort of justification I see from people who have invented perpetual motion machines.

    what about the actual evidence – the temperatures and ice melt of this last summer?

  25. Not so long ago, fetching my kid from school. A very concerned mother and president of the PTA suggests that I should refrain fromhauling my kid by car. It’s better for the environment, can’t I understand?

    Oh I see. She’s a climate scientist ? Of course not but that’s what science says, the atmosphere of the earth is burning ! And who am I to contradict science ?

    Happens, much earlier this morning we were precisely up there, in the supposedly burning atmosphere and saw nothing unusual over land and water.

    And I could animate, free of charge, a Q&A session for kids as PTA activity, even bring a weather guy along?

    Panic in her eyes. Hissing voice, yes, she’ll file all kind of complaints if I ever dare !

    These green folks are really propaganda fuel critical, trapped in their own spiraling delusion. Made my day.

    • I’ve had similar chastisements from CAGW alarmists about my contributing to “GlowBULL Warming” by driving or flying or (pick a CO2 straw man contributor). My favorite comeback is, “Well, I had to drive because I have to get to the airport right away to fly my next Chemtrail mission“…leaves them speechless.

  26. “Then they divide the sunshine by a kludge-factor of 4 in a clumsy attempt to adjust their sums for the fact that the Earth is round.”

    To be honest, that’s not a bad approximation considering the uncertainties involved.

    • It’s a good approximation of the sun shining on both sides of the Earth at the same time or on a flat Earth. Where I live, it gets dark after the apparent sunset and stays dark until apparent sunrise the way it should on a revolving sphere.

  27. “Then they divide the sunshine by a kludge-factor of 4 in a clumsy attempt to adjust their sums for the fact that the Earth is round”

    The area of a sphere is 4 times that of its section. Thats a fact of geometry, and perfectly normal to consider the ear receiving energy as a section and emitting it as a sphere.

    • “emitting it as a sphere”

      Oh my, my… The exact definition of spherical cow hypothesis.

      With that many conductivity, homogeneity, convection, refraction, relief, surface state, rotation and much more factors neglected.

      That’s how science fair level projects get to govern word’s prosperity. When ignorance becomes a highly sought after professional asset.

    • The earth only receives sunlight on one hemisphere at any given time, so how can anyone justify treating it as though it receives it on BOTH hemispheres at the same time? It does emit as a sphere.

  28. It’s the mission of gurus to cognitively damage you, rob you of yr precious self-possession , as per Messrs George Soros, Al Gore, Doctors Edward Bernays and Joseph G**bells, Chairman Mao and his down- the- memory -whole Cultural Revolution indoctrinating youth to dob in on their parents, and professors. – it goes wa-aay back, even to Plato, the philosopher king and his ‘noble’ because ‘necessary’ lie.

    • “It’s the mission of gurus to cognitively damage you, rob you of yr precious self-possession , as per Messrs George Soros, Al Gore,….”

      I don’t think so, beth. As I understand it, the mission of a genuine, authentic guru is to cognitively heal you, restore you to full possession of your true self and generally to enlighten and liberate you with original, direct perception of the One Reality.

      There are plenty of phony gurus around of course, and it is often not easy to tell which ones are true and which ones are phony. The combination of a true guru with his/her followers is called an “ashram”. The combination of a phony guru with his/her followers is called a “cult”.

  29. I understand there is a photograph of this young lady and George Soros. If that’s true then she is getting “paid ” in some way. Does her family profit from Wind and/or Solar power? Does her family profit from NGOs? I would like to know a little more about her and her family motivations.

    • the photo is apparently a photoshop job
      I havent seen it
      but he is very careful by whom and where he is ever pictured
      and tracking his “donations” to the activist groups is a laborius and twisted trail from prior reading

    • A private, unnamed, person has filed for an investigation and concern of what basically boils down to child abuse. Filed towards the local social services. Greta appears not to be doing so well and a note from Ilan Sadé is included in the filing. Mr Ilan Sadé says in the not (rough translation by me):
      När stora delar av vuxenvärlden och etablerade media deltar i masspsykosen kring Greta Thunberg – som helt uppenbart inte har det så bra – är det så att man måste nypa sig i armen. Är detta sant? Vad håller ni på med? Det här är inte sunt.
      When large parts of the grownup world and established media participate in mass psychoses around Greta Thunberg – who clearly don’t do so well – is it so one must pinch ones arm. Is this true? What are they up to? It is not healthy.

      My experience is that social services has to respond rather quickly to citizens or the police complaint about suspected child abuse. – So, interesting to see what happens.

  30. Sheffield University plan to incorporate a course on climate change in all undergraduate courses. Will it be brain washing or education? The bright students will know what is rubbish, give the “right” answers, get the tick in the box and a pass. Will those on “arts” courses have enough basic science to understand a rigorous course?

    • I sincerely hope that is not true. Sheffield University is still considered to be a serious one, not one with mandatory undergraduate political indoctrination courses that I read so much about in US Universities.

  31. Thankyou, Mr Monckton for an informative and entertaining lesson. Could I ask you to present it to the kindergarten on the Thames by Westminster bridge? Both classrooms, please. The kiddiwinks there really need to learn, as they are preparing to spend all our money on this non-existent problem. By the way, the kiddies are notoriously keen on their nap time, so you may want to take along something that makes a loud noise for when they start to nod off. One of my old teachers used to keep a mallet on his desk for this purpose.

  32. Lindzen comes up with a 19°C difference, I estimated the same at 20.5°… I’ll take it… This is the effect of setting albedo in the SB equations to ground albedo (about 0.15) instead of ground + clouds (which is about 0.305). This is absolutely the correct approach. The effect of clouds, a feedback, is the difference. The Earth’s albedo is not some magic, fixed number, it SETS itself very quickly (in minutes over localized areas) to equalize and balance ocean heat (the largest driver), which drives a very steep evaporation curve. The more heat oceans have, the very much more they evaporate, create clouds and shading, and they radiate out to space. The more effective the cooling is, the more albedo is reduced so that heat gain is restored. This process never stops, and is never in balance as the input (sun) is changing its position throughout the day. It is a brick wall with an extremely steep response (thunderstorms) with a nearly infinite headroom (about 1 million W/m^2 in the case of extremely heavy rain).

    It is nonsense to assume we don’t understand clouds. You don’t need to know the exact detail when everything else is boiled down and simplified in a typical Trenberth energy balance diagram. What we do know is the excursion in critical parameters (like turnover and precipitation). In a static diagram, latent heat is about 80 W/m^2, but it is the ONE that sets albedo in a dynamic situation, and can vary from zero (clear day) to 15,924 W/m^2 (rain at 1″ per hour), to 1 million (record setting rain). This is why they don’t show you the dynamic case.

  33. I look forward to her Hollywood acting career and the many movies where she shall proclaim the world is going to end by Nature!

    See Once there was group of people that decided their Red Party wasn’t as effective anymore. They needed a new control keep everything under their thumb.

    They created the Green Party. After all saying the world was going to drown wasn’t working, saying the earth was going to freeze everyone to death wasn’t working.

    It was time to take Marxist Communism to the new Max…Green Max! Captain Planet and Friends.

    The War on Nature and Breathing.

    What clever fellows these people are of course they shall use Children to push their agenda.

    The great Black Magic is working, every time there is a natural or unnatural disaster everyone cries climate change and see Global Warming is real!

  34. Greta thinks she is really smart. She declared to the UN: “People are suffering. People are dying. Entire ecosystems are collapsing. We are in the beginning of a mass extinction . . .”

    Her ignorance was on full display. If she looked at a simple chart of the total number of “climate” deaths this century from floods, droughts, storms and the like, she would see how these have fallen considerably over the past fifty years – her parents lifetime – and even more since 1900.

    There are numerous gaps and defects in her address – an address that was heartily applauded by UN delegates, politicians and most of the media. They, like her, all claim to “believe in science” but all display a woeful ignorance of how science works. They certainly believe the claims made in the name of science and the artificial models but conveniently ignore a mass of empirical data when this does not further their alarmist narrative.

    https://ourworldindata.org/ofdacred-international-disaster-data (Annual global number of deaths from natural catastrophes per decade, 1900-2015)

    https://www.npr.org/2019/09/23/763452863/transcript-greta-thunbergs-speech-at-the-u-n-climate-action-summit?t=1569498056079 (see video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rYxt0BeTrT8)

  35. Of course as we all know, Greta and her brainwashed teenaged mutant ninja idiots refuse to listen to or read anything which isn’t what is referred to as “the science”. Part and parcel to her “education” about climate change are turtle-like defense mechanisms to avoid taking in anything which doesn’t conform with the CAGW ideology. The first line of defense is usually the “denier” defense mechanism, meaning that if you have already been labeled as such by those within the climate cabal, then nothing you say will matter. It won’t be even considered, and will just be blocked from any rational thought (if such thought is even possible with them). Those unknown to you, at the first inkling of anything opposing the ideology will be considered a “denier”, and the same defense mechanism will be in play.

  36. Rows and floes of angel hair
    And ice cream castles in the air
    And feather canyons everywhere
    I’ve looked at clouds that way

    But now they only block the sun
    They rain and snow on everyone
    So many things I would have done
    But clouds got in my way

    I’ve looked at clouds from both sides now
    From up and down, and still somehow
    It’s cloud illusions I recall
    I really don’t know clouds at all

    etc. Joni Mitchell

  37. There is an old saying among lawyers. If the law is on your side then argue the law. If the facts are on your side then argue the facts. If neither are on your side then pound the table. It appears Greta and the rest of the zealots are in the table pounding phase.

  38. Bill and Ben the Flowerpot Men. I remember from sometime in the late 50’s early 60’s when we lived in Bury St. Edmunds and Burwell. My mother would gather us up to watch. She still said the lines into her 90’s.

    Thanks, that brought a smile to my face.

  39. It was great to hear that Greta Thunderpants has over-played her hand with all her shrieking and finger-pointing at the UN, alienating Merkel and Macron (and plenty of other world leaders) in the process.

    Let’s hope the burgeoning backlash continues to build momentum, it’s high time she was put back in her box.

    • Dreadnought
      The usual description of her behavior is “temper tantrum.” It is unacceptable in two-year olds and even less becoming in a teenager.

      • But uncontrolled anger is part and parcel of Asperger’s syndrome in someone who is afflicted with it, and if I read that look on her frozen face correctly, she’s quite capable of screaming tantrums. Rage like that, at being told ‘no’ is not uncommon in someone with that disorder.

        • Look carefully at her face for the whole speech. Turn off the sound.
          What you will see is that her hate face is not frozen in place.
          In fact, after every sentence, as she looks down to read her next line, her face changes completely to a sometimes neutral and sometimes pursed lips face.
          The closer one looks, the faker her angry hate face is seen to be.

          • Greta Thunberg
            Actress | Miscellaneous Crew

            https://www.imdb.com/name/nm10361418/?ref_=fn_al_nm_3

            Greta Thunberg was born on January 3, 2003 in Sweden as Greta Tintin Eleonora Ernman Thunberg. She is known for her work on Ave paraíso (2019), Climate Change: The Facts (2019) and Heti Dörgés Villám Gézával (2019). See full bio »
            Born: January 3, 2003 in Sweden
            1 video »

  40. For some reason, I was hearing the voice-over in my head done by Michael Caine. Perhaps he should play the part of you in the movie when this is all done. ;-D

  41. This is clever, to a point, But when you have this:

    “But just because someone says they think something bad is going to happen, that doesn’t mean it’s going to happen. It might not happen. So you mustn’t just believe it’s going to happen. You must check what you are told. Don’t just believe it.

    Miss Snorkel has told you the experts say the weather is going to get a whole lot warmer. So I’ve drawn a nice picture for you, so that you can see whether they’re right.”

    followed by this:

    “Observed warming (HadCRUT4: dark green cursor) due to 2.49 W m–2 net anthropogenic forcing from 1850-2011 (lower scale: IPCC 2013, figure SPM.5) scaled to 3.45 W m–2 2xCO2 forcing (Coupled Model Intercomparison Project, CMIP5: upper scale: Andrews 2012) … ”

    You have completely lost the children (and most adults). If you are going to convince you have to use understandable language, even when presenting the facts. All the children’s books that tout global warming do this. They would never dive into a discussion of “HadCRUT” or “anthropogenic forcing” or references to scholarly articles.

    Know your audience!

  42. Christopher Monckton of Brenchley, thank you for another amusing and informative post.

    I would like to take this opportunity to make several points. Greta and her juvenile friends are now suing several countries including Germany, France and Australia for failing to avert the climate disaster that is, according to Greta, causing extinctions. There have been references to this in the above thread but without explanation. Even those ignorant of the flawed science must now be feeling that this subject is descending into farce.

    Thank you for being a signatory to the letter from the 500 scientists to the UN, explaining that there is no climate crisis. Unfortunately, this initiative seems to have attracted almost zero publicity, even on this site. I hope that this, perhaps overdue but very welcome, intervention can be the subject of a more successful relaunch in the near future.

    Everyone who follows this subject must be aware that madness now dominates climate change and sceptical argument has failed. In the UK, the changes in attitude in the last year can probably be attributed to Extinction Rebellon, Greta, and relentless daily propaganda from the BBC. Much more recently, the UN and WMO have piled in with alarmist claims. Politicians are now competing to produce policies aimed at destroying every positive aspect of our way of life in pursuit of solving a hugely exaggerated and maybe non-existent problem.

    It is with this in mind that I ask for progress in your attempt to get publication of your paper on the feedback error. Rarely has so much depended on such an event.

    • Polls have long shown, and continue to show, that despite what people may say when asked about it directly, climate change is at or near the bottom of a long list of things people name as their primary concerns.
      In the US, a recent poll showed that a majority thought climate change was a valid issue, but when asked how much they are willing to personally spend to address it, the average for all people came to the round sum of one dollar.
      And that last figure is the true measure of how people feel about it.
      There is no widespread conviction that the world is about to end.
      Because it aint.

  43. My god that was a nice story, and all lovely pictures too…

    I feel a bit sorry for Greta she is Autistic — Asperger’s as am I. So I know how afraid she is — how bastards beyond belief are using her for their agenda. How they have filled her head with nonsense and the millions made of her as the new patron saint of global warming. The mobocracy rises and has learned nothing for four hundred years.
    I know how the fight or flight response is tearing at her very soul. And as they feed her like a foie gras goose, she will vomit the conditions. This will end in misery for her and the violence that she will inspire.

    These globalist bastards are hellbent to control all energy, and that is all it is about.

  44. Another fact to tell little Greta:

    Greta said that she should be in school, and if she was, she might learn about photosynthesis in high school biology class, whereby plants take CO2 from the air, water from the ground, and energy from the sun to make sugars that feed all the animals and people on the Earth. She might find out that florists inject extra CO2 into greenhouses to make their flowers grow faster, to be ready for Valentine’s Day.

    A mass balance on the atmosphere shows that the CO2 concentration in the air (at Mauna Loa) is only increasing half as fast as it would if all the human emissions of CO2 remained in the air, meaning that the other half is removed from the atmosphere by natural processes.

    So, by the time Greta is a grandma, the additional CO2 in the air will speed up plant growth and increase crop yields, and also increase the CO2 removal rate until it catches up with the emission rate, reaching a stable concentration (higher than now), with more forests and flowers and enough food for everyone. What’s wrong with that, Greta?

  45. The voting age should be raised to 30, after hopefully some real world experience. Also they may at that age be better able to rethink the Marxist indoctrination they have been exposed to in the education socialist industry.

  46. Well, that pic of Greta can surely scare the sh** out of any person regardless of age…

    The poor girl is a ‘product’ (long-term) of a society, that’s been detoriating since the periods of mr Olof Palme being in power here in Sweden. OP initiated the Swedish school ‘revolution’ that now has morphed to a never before seen downfall in all aspects. The international PISA-surveys show, year-by-year, that the education system here falls to levels of 25 and lower in comparision w the other countries in the surveys. It’ll take many generations of hard work to ‘repair’ this nation – if possible at all, that is.

    ‘Look what happende to Sweden, Sweden !’ Mr Trump said after a shoot-out/car burning ‘event’ last year. Now, the fact is, that those horrible things are nowadays daily and hardly noticed/mentioned. This, my, country is actually a total contructive loss and we’re heading for some extremely hard times to come.

    If possible, I’d do the same as an increasingly number of Swedes do; leave the country for ever.

    Regards.
    //TJ

  47. Just for the sake of accuracy, young Christopher should remember that “are you sitting comfortably” was from Listen With Mother, a 15 minute slot in the afternoon. Children’s Hour was from 5 to 6pm. I remember it well!
    Larry the Lamb, Norman and Henry Bones… who needed TV (which we didn’t have)?

    Anthea

  48. It was only a matter of time….now it begins….

    JUST IN: A 14 year old child from Manchester, U.K. reportedly commits suicide ‘because of climate change’
    https://twitter.com/BreakingNLive/status/1177273817984581633

    GRETA AND THOSE WHO EXPLOITED HER NOW HAVE BLOOD ON THEIR HANDS!!

    Greta and David Hogg, the gun-grabbing fake mass-shooting victim
    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/7bc36a9c150e5ef211d540ebb71c5d25d5df2c1a8e78f26c63dbf7a0034fa523.jpg

  49. I feel rather sorry for this kid. The Aspergers means she’s already so vulnerable to brainwashing, and man, has that ever been successful. Bader Meinhoff’s trainers would be leaning forward, enthralled, at how thoroughly and well it’s been done. Then, because of mass communications, the internet-connected world gets subjected to her rantings, a script written by the same people who have decided to load her up and fire her at society. And it’s so cynical, so using and manipulative. These people are testing public reaction, to see what will happen. They don’t care about Greta, or her message. This is just an exercise to see if this is an effective strategy, using and abusing a frightened kid to chide the world. It doesn’t matter if people hate it, or see that it’s a fraud. What matters is that it keeps their agenda, their debate, rolling the way they want it. We talk about it, we get excited about it, that’s enough for those people. And meanwhile the people who aren’t prepared to do the science (thank you, Christopher, thank you all the thinkers on this blog who do do the hard yards and who are prepared to stand up and share their knowledge and say, hey, this what’s actually happening, to debate it calmly and logically and with some actual facts, thank you!)… trouble is, the people who aren’t prepared to do this take all this scaremongering to mean that this agenda is touting something real, and that we should be panicking and spending money we don’t have to fix something that isn’t a problem.
    Now, I’m in New Zealand. As the world knows, we had a horrifying act of terrorism committed here in March, our beautiful, peaceful country’s somewhat naive ideals invaded and raped when a madman deliberately shot up and killed innocents worshipping peacefully. Massive praise to the New Zealand police, who stepped up and got that highly defective individual. New Zealanders don’t name him. His actions mean he’s forfeited the right to a human identity. He’s just a sick killer, brainwashed the same way little Greta has been. What we’ve learned, in New Zealand, is that the haters, the people who create creatures like that gunman, and like poor little Greta, don’t care about their tools. They don’t care about anything except headlines and exposure, and they watch reactions, to gauge how next to move their poisonous agendas forward.
    So Greta’s got us all talking. I hope, I really hope, that what we say will stop being about how misguided and ignorant she is, about how unfortunate her hairstyle and general presentation is, and instead starts questioning how this was allowed to happen, and examines the agendas of the people who are pushing her into a limelight and a pack of trouble she really doesn’t deserve. Because she’s being crucified, this kid. The vilification drips acid on her, every webpage I’ve read. And yes, at 16, you could argue she should have a few clues. A bit of understanding that standing up and shouting at people doesn’t achieve anything, expect making the audience cross. But she doesn’t see this, and this is the Aspergers. What’s been done to her is so cruel, because she believes, believes with white-hot fervency, that her message is right, and that we are doomed. Students of literature will know that Jeanne of Arc suffered similarly. Because Greta is being roasted at the stake of public opinion, sentenced to being an irredeemable nut bar. No matter what she does, she’ll never get free of the stench of this. And at 16, oh, what a difficult age. First faltering steps into adulthood, and she’s already slipped off society’s stepping stones and into the swamp of doom.
    Sweden’s welfare services evidently couldn’t help at the sharp end, while this child was being abused and this little monster created. Hopefully their mental health services will be better equipped, to handle the meltdown when this exploited human finally realises it’s all been a cynical manipulation and breaks apart.
    What’s really disgusting is the way the UN bought into it. The way all these supposedly educated, rich, powerful world leaders are fawning over this damaged kid, allowing the monsters driving her to create hydra heads, at the expense of a young woman’s mental health. Guys, go and stop some wars, will you? Please? Justify your enormous bloody salaries? Put yourselves in the front lines, maybe, yeah, that’d do it. Let the soldiers come home and reconstruct and fix the problems in their own societies.
    For goodness sake, get Greta some help! Seeing carbon dioxide? Please! Help needed!

  50. Please help me.
    My kids are besotted by our sweet little Greta and all she has to say. The kids are indoctrinated by their teachers to believe all the global warming ‘facts’ using Greta as their poster child.
    I’ve tried for years to de-program my kids, but they are taught how to refute skeptics and deniers with all the internet resourses at their fingertips.
    I have also gone online to find books and information suitable for children but all I can find are websites for kids to teach their parents about global warming and other sites for parents and teachers to teach children about global warming (I was shocked by the resources available for teachers on the National Library website).
    Can anyone point in the right direction to find books and information for kids (I also want to save my nieces before they become indoctrinated.). Everything I have seen so far fills me with the same dread and terror some German parents in the 30’s must have felt when their kids with came home with their text books.
    I can hear my kids in a time not to far from now “Daddy, your a bad global warmer denier; we’ll have to report you to the authorities, maybe some time in a re-education camp will help you see the truth.”

  51. “The truth is that there’s no chance the world will come to an end by 2100 because of global warming.”

    Let alone in 12 years.

  52. Not that fast, Patrick MJD:

    https://www.google.com/search?q=moon+atmosphere+composition&oq=moon+athm&aqs=chrome.

    – EVERY celestial body with temperatures under the boiling point of water, temperature at which a liquid boils and turns to vapor

    should have some kind of atmosphere. Since every celestial body is a gravitational sink and all space hosts hydrogen, alcohols, ethanol – the building material of life: c6h12o6

    – leads to the conclusion: the real alians is us, landing on a cooling planet in gaseous form making planet Earth our home.

    the

Comments are closed.