By Christopher Monckton of Brenchley
The Global Climate Intelligence Group, whose objective is to put the science back into climate science, comprises scientists, professionals and researchers from many nations, has already attracted some 500 signatures for what began life scant weeks ago as the European Climate Declaration.
The group, and the declaration, are the brainchild of Professor Guus Berkhout, emeritus professor of Geophysics in the Delft University of Technology. Professor Berkhout is a member of the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences.
Professor Guus Berkhout
Among the luminaries who have signed the declaration is Professor Václav Klaus, former President of the Czech Republic, who is known to many of us as a formidable speaker at Heartland conferences and at meetings of the World Federation of Scientists (and, in Britain, at Brexit Party rallies, to the great delight of his audiences).
Professor Richard Lindzen, the world’s foremost climate scientist, is also a signatory, and is the Group’s Ambassador to the United States of America.
Professors Reynald du Berger, Jeffrey Foss, Ingemar Nordin, Alberto Prestinzini, Benoît Rittaud and Fritz Vahrenholt are the Ambassadors to Francophone Canada, Anglophone Canada, Sweden, Italy, France and Germany respectively. These are heavy-hitters.
The declaration says –
There is no climate emergency
A global network of 500 scientists and professionals has prepared this urgent message. Climate science should be less political, while climate policies should be more scientific. Scientists should openly address the uncertainties and exaggerations in their predictions of global warming, while politicians should dispassionately count the real benefits as well as the imagined costs of adaptation to global warming, and the real costs as well as the imagined benefits of mitigation.
Natural as well as anthropogenic factors cause warming
The geological archive reveals that Earth’s climate has varied as long as the planet has existed, with natural cold and warm phases. The Little Ice Age ended as recently as 1850. Therefore, it is no surprise that we now are experiencing a period of warming.
Warming is far slower than predicted
The world has warmed at less than half the originally-predicted rate, and at less than half the rate to be expected on the basis of net anthropogenic forcing and radiative imbalance. It tells us that we are far from understanding climate change.
Climate policy relies on inadequate models
Climate models have many shortcomings and are not remotely plausible as policy tools. Moreover, they most likely exaggerate the effect of greenhouse gases such as CO2. In addition, they ignore the fact that enriching the atmosphere with CO2 is beneficial.
CO2 is plant food, the basis of all life on Earth
CO2 is not a pollutant. It is essential to all life on Earth. Photosynthesis is a blessing. More CO2 is beneficial for nature, greening the Earth: additional CO2 in the air has promoted growth in global plant biomass. It is also good for agriculture, increasing the yields of crops worldwide.
Global warming has not increased natural disasters
There is no statistical evidence that global warming is intensifying hurricanes, floods, droughts and suchlike natural disasters, or making them more frequent. However, CO2-mitigation measures are as damaging as they are costly. For instance, wind turbines kill birds and insects, and palm-oil plantations destroy the biodiversity of the rainforests.
Climate policy must respect scientific and economic realities
There is no climate emergency. Therefore, there is no cause for panic and alarm. We strongly oppose the harmful and unrealistic net-zero CO2 policy proposed for 2050. If better approaches emerge, we will have ample time to reflect and adapt. The aim of international policy should be to provide reliable and affordable energy at all times, and throughout the world.
The text, together with the list of signatories, is at https://t.co/Pz7ZtsMOYV?amp=1. The signatories are prominent scientists from a wide range prominent group of scientists with an unprecedentedly wide range of disciplines, indispensable in addressing the climate question.
If you agree with the declaration and would like to sign it, please write in the first instance to me, monckton [at] mail.com, and enclose your resumé. I shall pass your name to the academic council, which will then contact you.
Ideas for the Global Climate Intelligence Group’s future program of work include an online, open-access Journal of Corrections to publish learned papers, peer-reviewed by qualified members of the Group, that will put right the often erroneous and unsound science published in the pal-review journals of climate “science”.
Members of the Group are also considering hosting national and international scientific conferences, providing speakers and lecturers willing to balance the one-sided and militantly wrong pseudo-science that now holds sway, providing articles for those of the mainstream media who – unlike the unspeakable BBC – are willing to honor their obligation of giving both sides of every story, making documentaries (the first of which is already at the planning stage), and establishing a legal defense fund to assist those, such as Professor Peter Ridd of the Great Barrier Reef, who have been libeled, punished or dismissed for daring to do what scientists ought to do – to take no one’s word for it and to go on asking questions until the truth emerges.
The idea of online universities on the model of the Open University and Liberty University is also being considered by some members of the Group, and the possibility of establishing an internet based home-schooling network for pupils aged 3 to 18 is also under consideration.
All teachers, lecturers, professors and students in the new network of schools and universities will sign a binding contract with the holding corporation. That contract will govern their conduct, and will in particular forbid them, on pain of expulsion, to interfere in any way with freedom of academic inquiry, research, thought, speech or action.
The Group will also establish friendly relations with other independent-minded entities worldwide that are dedicated to the advancement of true science free of totalitarian taint.
Above all, as the declaration says, the Group will argue that “climate science should be less political, while climate policies should be more scientific. Scientists should openly address the uncertainties and exaggerations in their predictions of global warming, while politicians should dispassionately count the real benefits as well as the imagined costs of adaptation to global warming, and the real costs as well as the imagined benefits of mitigation.”
Let pure reason, not totalitarian prejudice, hold sway once more in the groves of academe, the corridors of power and the public square!
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Great news. For too long the “97% of scientists…..” has been quoted as the de facto argument of the AGW supporters. Getting the real science out there will be fantastic. Well done.
A bunch of retired guys.
and then these
Rob Lemeire, publicist
Eric Blondeel, retired Civil Engineer.
Drieu Godefridi, PhD in Law,
Jan Jacobs, Science Journalist
Patrick de Casanove, Doctor of Medicine
Philippe Catier, Medical Doctor
Patrick Mellett, architect and CEO.
Tony J. Carey, BA (Natural Sciences),
Owen O’Brien, Business Founder and Entrepreneur
Eduard Harinck, Former Logistics Expert,
Elsa Widding, Consultant,
Jozef Verhulst, Author
Appo van der Wiel, Senior Development Engineer
Jean-Pierre Bardinet, Ingénieur ENSEM, publicist
Dr. Thiago Maia, Nuclear Physicist with PhD in Astrophysics, wrote critical climate
letter to Brazilian Government
Joe Fone, CAD Engineer, Enatel Ltd
David Wojick, Cognitive Scientist, USA
Bob Zybach, Program Manager, Oregon Websites and Watersheds Project I
Gregory R. Wrightstone, Expert Reviewer IPCCC 6th Assessment Report (AR6), USA
I LOVE the guys who listed IPCC reviwer, especially the guy who listed IPCCC reviewer
Listing IPCC reviwer as a credential is down right funny
there were many more
The list was hilarious. wanna bes and has beens
Steven
You think a bunch of retired folks are funny…
Pity. You are the one who is mistaken. It is the retired folks who have the experience with science. The rest all believe in junk science. Hence, we have 97% of them actually believing that CO2 is a posion and that it can cause warming of the earth….
I would sign that document. It’s the truth.
“The list was hilarious.” For an idiot, yes.
Bitter much darling?
How about this one:
Steven Mosher: English major (Who can’t figure out how to fix his smart phone typos)
Now THAT one is hilarious.
In steve’s world, once you retire they put your brain in a lock box and you are not permitted to use it any more.
On the other hand, steve has given up trying to defend the climate scam. Instead all he does is find excuses to ignore anyone who doesn’t agree with what he is paid to support.
“Listing IPCC reviwer as a credential is down right funny”
Right, because Steve McIntyre certainly has no credentials. I think you’re getting senile.
Actually the bunch of retired professors is a good sign they are not in it for the money, the way the so called “consensus”with global warming are.
Why is it funny to list IPCC reviewer in bio? A lot of the first reviewers got disgusted with the way science was prostituted afrer all.
the “wanna” still beat Greta and the rest of the brain washed kids, no?
the link for the list is here https://clintel.nl/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/ED-brochureversieNWA4.pdf
Albert Einstein could well have listed “retired patent clerk” on his resume, if asked to provide one. Is that considered funny?
Steven Mosher,
I am always interested in the strange things simple-minded people find amusing.
You write,
“Listing IPCC reviwer (sic) as a credential is down right funny”
Funny? Really? I know that little things amuse little minds but your statement makes no sense.
I am listed as a signatory to the petition as follows:
“SCIENTISTS AND PROFESSIONALS FROM UNITED KINGDOM
6. Richard Courtney, Retired Material Scientist, Expert Peer Reviewer of the IPCC”
That seems a very sensible listing when on 15 September I sent the following email which resulted in the listing.
Subject: Request to be included in a petition
Dear Dr Berkhout,
Please forgive my writing to you in English: I do not speak nor write Italian.
I have read your excellent petition and I am writing to request that my name be appended to it as a signatory or failing that as a supporter.
I am an Englishman: (i.e. not an Italian). And I am a retired material scientist (i.e. not an active climate scientist). However, I think my name would be an appropriate addition to your petition for the following reasons.
I have published in the peer-reviewed literature on climate model validation and on the carbon cycle. Your petition cites the 2009 Report of the Non-governmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC) and I was a contributor to that document. And, although I am not an American, the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) nominated me as an Expert Peer Reviewer for the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and I accepted that nomination.
I hope and request that you will give me the honour of having my name attached to your excellent petition, and I am copying this request to the email discussion group, global warming realists (GWR), who informed me of it.
Yours sincerely
Richard S Courtney
As you can see, I admitted to being a “has been” but you are a never will be.
So, Stephen Mosher, please explain the mystery of your amusement at the listing.
Richard
It would be easier to ask him to open his mouth so he change his foot.
Steven,
You’re just having fun and winding us up, right?
Retired people?
You mean like Freeman Dyson? Professor Will Happer?Richard Lindzen?And then there’s …….
Unqualified people? Al Gore. Tim Flannery.
Stop,I get the joke.
Mosher … never waz! (cant be a haz been)
Seriously Mosh, why are you here?
Can’t be much fun being a perpetual troll … why don’t you go help some poor folk in Africa
Get a life
An English major (who can’t even fix simple typos on his phone) wannabe scientist referring to actual scientists with decades of experience in their fields as “has-beens” is what is truly hilarious. Shame Mosh doesn’t have the self-awareness to realize that.
Mosher is correct. Virtually none on the list have worked in climate science in their careers. while he has been immersed despite not having basic science education. Clowns and poseurs on the list include Monckton (who runs from debate when getting his clock cleaned by potholer54) and Richard Courtney ( no science education or climate science research. Start there and then tell me how journalists and medical doctors add gravitas to this list of venal, fossil fuel shills?
Rob,
You make two personal statements about me; i.e. “no science education or climate science research”. Both are falsehoods.
If you wish to make personal statements then please make them about yourself.
Richard
@richard
I can find no evidence to support your assertions. Everything I find contradicts what you are vehemently denying. Again, point me to the evidence and I will make amends if need be.
Rob,
There is no requirement for any person to provide personal information demanded by anonymous internet trolls.
I have learned the hard way that it is not possible to prove anything to such trolls. I have informed you that you have told specific lies about me, and you have responded by saying you don’t believe me. It is certain that you will dispute any evidence I state in response to that.
APOLOGISE.
Then, as I said, if you wish to make personal statements then please make them about yourself.
Richard
(He is Permanently BANNED) SUNMOD
SUNMOD,
Sincere thanks. Your action has avoided any need for me to defend myself by taking actions I do not want to take.
Richard
Oh look, the troll that denies the reality of the climate gate emails (calling them “fiction”) and then lies about doing so is back. Keep dancing troll, and we’ll keep laughing (at you).
A reply of no substance with the word “troll” shows you are a simple-minded, weak character who is easily defeated by thos of us who are informed and experts in climate science. Unless you have scrutinized the source data yourself and are an expert in climate science, then the principle nullius in verba applies.
Climategate emails are a fictional meme among denizens of the science denial cult and climate fiction claques. Known cures: 1. education 2. do not remain aliterateThis regurgitation of spin by people who are basically apologists against the scientific consensus that humanity is largely responsible for recent global warming is not worth my or your attention. You are the kind of person who thinks a cold day is proof that global warming is nonsense then Climategate is your ignorant bailiwick. Climategate is nothing less than the misrepresentation of an egregious act of data theft against a respected UK university.
(Policy remineder: “Trolls, flame-bait, personal attacks, thread-jacking, sockpuppetry, name-calling such as “denialist,” “denier,” and other detritus that add nothing to further the discussion may get deleted;..”) SUNMOD
John Endicott,
You say the troll who repeatedly attempts to malign me calls the ‘climategate’ emails “fiction”.
In that case these links will really wind it up.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/05/12/a-mann-uva-email-not-discussed-here-before-claims-by-mann-spliced-and-diced/
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmselect/cmsctech/387b/387we02.htm
Please note that the latter link would put me in jail for perjuring Parliament if it were untrue.
Richard
Recently, under a ‘Thunberg’ news item, I had commented: Yes, lots of kids, lots of journalists, lots of politicians, BUT WHERE ARE THE SCENTISTS?
Thankfully here they are, but I am pretty sure that the kids, the journalists and the politicians will do their damnest to kill the scientists’ message.
But hope springs eternal.
“The Three-Percenters”
That’s a hundred times better, conservatively speaking.
Would that be “The Three Percent Solution”?
It’s the anti-ninety-percenters.
Is there a way that scientists and engineers who are “Climate Change – global warming” skeptics join this new group? The many many thousands who would sign up would no doubt overwhelm the “97% Scam.
I’m glad we/skepticism is taking what seems to be a credible stand but the challenge will be getting the MSM to report this is even happening much less the groups’ progress. So far the media has been 100% behind AGW and not allowing dissenting voices to be heard….. be design, not choice.
Beautifully reasoned approach.
This effort is destined to fail. It is too rational. It lacks Marvin, the paranoid android. How do you translate “Marvin” to Swedish?
What’s the status of petition project.org these days? 31,000 sceptic American scientists with 9000 PhDs can’t br wrong? Is it defunct? Add them in!
Is this the start of scientists standing up for science? Let’s hope so! That is the one movement the Eco nutters must fear.
> The text, together with the list of signatories, is at https://t.co/Pz7ZtsMOYV?amp=1.
That link leads to:
Deze pagina kunnen we helaas niet vinden!
404
Looks like the pg is there but not shared with any and all?
I can link to the link you give. try this https://clintel.nl/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/ED-brochureversieNWA4.pdf ,
“Professor Richard Lindzen, the world’s foremost climate scientist, is also a signatory, and is the Group’s Ambassador to the United States of America.”
Mmmm…. didn’t Lindzen retire in 2013?
Simon,
Yes, he did, and he is still the world’s foremost climate scientist by far.
Richard
Thumps up. For both of the Richards on the list.
And you base that on his previous work obviously. Don’t get me wrong he is a sharp cookie. He accepts mans part in the warming, but like most scientists on this side of the fence (Spencer, Curry) thinks the problems wont be that bad. Still it’s a stretch to say a guy who is no longer working in the field is the “worlds foremost climate scientist.”
Simon,
Lindzen is by far the world’s foremost climate scientist because of his body of work in the field of climatology. Hence, his opinions on the subject of climatology are persuasive.
The fact that he retired a few years ago do not (and cannot) alter those facts.
And those facts are not affected by anonymous internet concern trolls not liking them.
Lesser scientists are still working in the field, but so what?
Richard
“Still it’s a stretch to say a guy who is no longer working in the field …”
He’s no longer teaching classes. But maybe he has an on-campus office. Presumably he’s still reading journals in his field, and conversing with colleagues, etc. Perhaps he’s still doing some writing.
Perhaps. He hasn’t published a paper since retirement.
Simon,
You say of Richard Lindzen, he “hasn’t published a paper since retirement”.
So what?
Has Michael Mann published an apology for his ‘hockey stick’ yet? His first version of that travesty was in 1998 (MBH98).
Or has Kevin Trenberth at last admitted that his ‘missing heat’ shows his version of AGW is nonsense?
Or has Ben’ Santer provided the needed apology for his attempt to pretend he had found evidence of AGW in the 1990s?
Or etc.
Value of scientific work is determined by the usefulness of the work.
The value of scientific work is not indicated by how long since it was published: if it were then the works of Newton, Faraday and Einstein would be worthless by now.
Richard Lindzen is undoubtedly the greatest living climatologist (e.g. his ‘climate iris’ is being used in papers published during the past month) and your attempts to denigrate him fail completely.
Richard
A very immature and puerile comment. The writer is obviously not a scientist, let alone a climate scientist. The reader can review the veracity fo this at https://www.desmog.co.uk/richard-s-courtney
Scientists are graded and rated by their peers and history. Mann is rated in the top 50 living US scientists today by the NSF. Courtney is confused as to how science advances and MBH98 is seminal climate science, now strong theory being corroborated over 45 times by published peer-reviewed articles in noted scientific journals.
Lindzen, was a great meteorologist and professor of meteorology at MIT. He proposed the Iris effect, and it turns out to be right but in the exact opposite direction, he predicted. How did he miss so bad? He only calculated outgoing radiation changes and not incoming. Seems pretty obvious. Other than that, Lindzen fossil fuel and ex-tobacco shill has not contributed anything worthwhile. he also lost a Court Case for his client in 2016 with fellow creationists and contrarian fossil fuel propagandists, Spencer and Happer who were admonished by the judge for not using peer-reviewed science but conspiracy and junk science from WUWT, Heartland Inst., etc.
So, NO, not the greatest climate scientists living today despite amateur and poseur Cortney’s adulation and prejudiced feelings. My schadenfreude has no limits to know that the venal scientist will probably never get his exorbitant fees reimbursed as he’s listed as a creditor in Peabody’s subsequent bankruptcy filing.
Rob
It seems to me this ‘list’ is becoming somewhat of a challenge to you, so that you could stop starting attacking and smearing some of the people that have been listed?
I am interested reading about your credentials? But there is no link to your name, not even a surname….
I have learned a lot from my encounters with Richard S. Courtney here on WUWT and I am sorry that you did not learn anything from him. Indeed, there are none so blind as those who do not want to see.
You can click on my name to learn more about me and my research on natural climate change.
Geagte Boet Hendrik,
Anonymity does not alter one’s knowledge or education, in fact it makes it stronger by removing bias. As a white Afrikaner/Hollander, you already carry the bias of being a vile christian supremacist and racist being a supporter of apartheid. That’s a pretty tough hurdle to overcome and you probably would have benefitted from staying anonymous. Perhaps you have evolved on this issue and now support your opposition because they provide a strong counter to the ANC but have you managed to beat back your indoctrinated demons? How do you feel about the recent exposé of senior apartheid cabinet ministers and their pedophile rings flying to islands (using military assets) at the height of segregation, akin to our Epstein and Trump with underage girls? Your memory immigrating to South Africa in 1976 (for which you were most likely reimbursed for by the apartheid government with a settlement stipend too, all while the majority of South Africans were denied their basic rights) was drought and not the famous children’s uprising in the Soweto riots? Think Greta! Viva Greta! Long live Greta! A luta continua, vitória é certa!
I too have learned from Courtney, climate fiction apologists are usually not educated or experienced and regurgitate what they glean from their bubbles. I read your thoughts and efforts on climate change on your website and conclude you are scientifically illiterate and nescient when it comes to climate science. South Africa has great scientists that have contributed much to this modern world through discoveries and inventions. One of the most recent being the 3-D printing and implanting of the ear bones in a patient who had lost their hearing due to an auto accident in your very city of Pretoria.
I visit South Africa less often these days now that I am retired and will contact you next time I am scheduled to review some ongoing projects so we can have a debate and raise some funds for charity. The winner gets two thirds for their nominated charity and the loser one third for theirs. Mine would be Cotlands, a hospice for HIV/AIDS babies. The debate moderator can be UP climate scientist with a panel of two professionals (one of your choice and one of mine) whom as a minimum must be Earth scientists or Geographers with climatology experience. Their secret vote will determine the winner. I am a PG in the US (PA) and P.Sci.Nat in RSA and ISO14000 Certified 14000 auditor (all active, in the retired category).
(A reminder of policy: “Respect is given to those with manners, those without manners that insult others or begin starting flame wars may find their posts deleted….Trolls, flame-bait, personal attacks, thread-jacking, sockpuppetry, name-calling such as “denialist,” “denier,” and other detritus that add nothing to further the discussion…”) SUNMOD
Rob
I am amazed by your comment
you claim to have read my relevant blog post (click on my name), yet you call me a racist? Perhaps you cannot even read properly? I wrote that I and many others fought 18 years (counting from the year that I arrived, i.e. 1976) to bring an end to apartheid and I did keep the evidence to prove it, even my letters to Prof. Heyns {the leader of the Dutch Reformed Church] who was then murdered for taking the right side… Indeed, if we had not won that battle [of the minds], this country [ South Africa] would have ended in a very bloody civil war, as you well know. The similarities with the US an RSA are in fact uncanny, except for the fact of a few decades difference, e.g. a great spiritual leader like Martin Luther King being murdered just like Prof. Heyns was.
[I did visit Atalanta some time ago and perhaps a visit by you to the MLK centre might be worth your while]
For the record, Indeed, my ticket was paid for, as would have been the case if I had chosen Canada [too cold] or Australia [no friends or family]. There was no other financial support, other than a payment for a few days in the hotel until you find a job. I had no problem with that….
Indeed, one of the foster homes that we are supporting financially is in need of renovations and we urgently need about $15000. I will gladly debate with you that there is no man made global warming, or if indeed if it does exist, it is so small that I could not find it
as reported,
http://breadonthewater.co.za/2018/05/04/which-way-will-the-wind-be-blowing-genesis-41-vs-27/
I am sure it would be an interesting debate?
(This is getting off topic…) SUNMOD
Geagte Boet Pool,
I can find no evidence of you being an anti-apartheid activist as assert on your website. I am well contected with that tiny white minority although many have passed on. The most recent I know of being Theo Hefer, who was dubbed by Van Zyl Slabberet as being more Marxist than Marx in jest during the clandestine times as apartheid was drawing to an end and the government was desperately seeking allies sto help it out of its mess and negotiate with the ANC. I cannot find you in the database at the Christian Institute of anti-apartheid activists. So where would I get corroboration so that I can apologize if I maligned you in that respect? Heyns was no MLK, even my dear friend Desmond Tutu would not make that claim and he probably caused the collapse of Apartheid as much as the Pope knocked off communism during the cold war. And yes I have visited MLK museum in Atlanta several times, the last was this past July. BTW: I do admire you taking care of the poor, that is commendable and I hope you do so without proselytizing.
I have looked at your work and it doesn’t make sense mixing coastal stations and inland stations as the former are influenced by the ocean. I have worked on many projects as a specialist consultant on earth, weather, climate and other environmental issues throughout southern Africa that required paleoclimate and weather data (that go back to the 19th century). Don’t know why you start your analyses in the 1970s. Unfortunately, many are mining and top-secret classified and involve a well known nuclear facility near you and other shared (with US, Israel, and EU cooperation) southern African military installations. One positive to military sites is the wildlife re-establishes itself quickly and flourishes.
Rob
We r going off topic here. Sunmod is right.
You can contact me by email and I will answer.
From what I saw, I will defend all people on the list including Guus who started this initiative.
Ok. Lekker bly. Totsiens
@moderator
You placed this footer on my reply to henryp:
(A reminder of policy: “Respect is given to those with manners, those without manners that insult others or begin starting flame wars may find their posts deleted….Trolls, flame-bait, personal attacks, thread-jacking, sockpuppetry, name-calling such as “denialist,” “denier,” and other detritus that add nothing to further the discussion…”) SUNMOD
I cannot make that statement comport with my reply. I am trying to be a court citizen in your dictatorship/censorship world as you apparently are not consistent when I peruse the comments. For my edification, please advise me as to where or what contravened your policy. Otherwise, I will have to assume or consider that you are being discriminatory.
[calling someone “racist” is a personal attack – stop it – mod]
(This comments stays in moderation, NOT ON TOPIC, and wasting moderators time) SUNMOD
( FOURTH time you are given a policy warning today, “Trolls, flame-bait, personal attacks, thread-jacking, sockpuppetry, name-calling such as “denialist,” “denier,” and other detritus that add nothing to further the discussion may get deleted;…Respect is given to those with manners, those without manners that insult others or begin starting flame wars may find their posts deleted”) SUNMOD
@moderator
Your false assertion is not supported by the evidence.
Moderator:
[calling someone “racist” is a personal attack – stop it – mod]
Me:
As a white Afrikaner/Hollander, you already carry the bias of being a vile christian supremacist and racist being a supporter of apartheid. With all due respect, it is clear I did not call him a racist but specifically used the qualifier “bias” which also can be replaced with “handle or mantle”.
[ This is what you wrote: “As a white Afrikaner/Hollander, you already carry the bias of being a vile christian supremacist and racist being a supporter of apartheid.”
You used the word racist in a derogatory way. There’s no dispute.
You are back on a time out, 96 hours this time. There will not be any further times out after this if you continue to call people names, and insult them in other ways. Clean up you act or you will be permanently banned – mod]
Rob,
You say to the mod,
“I cannot make that statement comport with my reply. I am trying to be a court citizen in your dictatorship/censorship world as you apparently are not consistent when I peruse the comments. For my edification, please advise me as to where or what contravened your policy. Otherwise, I will have to assume or consider that you are being discriminatory.”
Discriminatory?!!
In several posts distributed through this thread you have repeatedly claimed I have no qualifications and I have conducted no climate research. Also, you have attempted to bolster those falsehoods by linking to a smear site.
That defamatory behaviour is clearly sufficient to have you banned from any site.
Indeed, it is sufficient misbehaviour that I could take action against WUWT for publishing those posts of yours that are hidden behind a coward’s screen of anonymity.
Richard
(Moderators know about it, he is now BANNED) SUNMOD
In New Zealand 2 media companies (APN and Fairfax) control 74% of daily newspapers. They both have signed on to a global media group dedicated to constantly emphasise the “climate emergency”. The online version for Fairfax is Stuff. Never goes a day without an alarmist piece on climate. They used to allow comments which were dominated by skeptics. Any comments I have made in the past using real data with sources were never published.
Now, guess what? – no more comments section associated with climate stories.
The full list of the media climate consortium is here:
https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/climate-news/114526071/stuff-joins-over-60-global-news-outlets-taking-strong-stance-on-climate-change-coverage?rm=a
Cheers
M
In about 2000, Stuff published an article (I wonder if it can be found on the Wayback Machine?), a meteorologist I don’t recall the name who wrote it, however the author went on to say that there had been no significant increase in temperatures across NZ over the past 40 years or more. The article was quickly removed. The media is heavily controlled in NZ, always has been.
I used to work for BNZ in Wellington and worked with the son of Augie Auer, an atmospheric scientist and meteorologist. He didn’t believe in the climate change narrative either. Unfortunately, he died a few years ago.
At least Stuff are open and honest about their agenda….
They are certainly honest about their propaganda…
There, fixed it for ya!
As an expat kiwi I follow the papers including stuff and cannot believe what I read. Current Incidences of seawater washing over the road near Eastbourne and Plimmerton are attributed to climate change, but the exact same thing happened over 50 years ago when I lived there. It is simply a combination of high tide and a strong southerly. What happened to the facts?
Are you saying the sea hasn’t risen since then? Erosion around the coast (and in the harbour) has certainly stepped up.
You forget the land around Wellington has risen many times in the past. The land the airport is on wasn’t there in 1840. And I too recall sea lapping over the road at Eastbourne too. Nothing unusual there.
The last time Wellington came up was in 1855 when the big one hit. And you are missing the point. As the water rises the problems compound around Wellington and other sea level cities. And it is happening. No amount of denying it will make it stop.
Don’t recall any pavement plaques in Wellington along Lambton Quay showing the shoreline in 1855, certainly 1840 was the significant one. I guess that’s why they were put there to remind people.
Have a look at the land around Pencarrow Head, might give you an idea. Lake Wairarapa was considerably bigger in 1840 too.
Talking of level cites, say Portsmouth, Gosport, Exeter even Emsworth in the UK show no significant sea level changes for HUNDREDS of years.
https://my.christchurchcitylibraries.com/wellington-earthquake/
1855 was the big one as you can see. Yes the land goes up and down in Welly but that has little to do with sea level rise… which it is. I know Pencarrow head well. Love it, great fishing. That’s close to where Dr Dave Lowe did his now famous CO2 atmospheric recordings.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/115040931/kiwi-dave-lowe-found-measurable-proof-of-climate-change-50-years-ago–hes-watched-in-horror-ever-since
Interesting read there Simon however, there is no proof of man-made climate change in that article.
“The first ever CO2 reading at Baring Head was 326 Parts Per Million. The most recent reading was 409 Parts Per Million.”
So in 50 years, CO2 concentrations at that monitoring station have risen, and according to Mr. Lowe, that is proof of man-made climate change?
The article also states Mr. Lowe had to “constantly” fly between Wellington and California. I guess he wasn’t too worried about that carbon footprint. No mention of his qualifications. Interesting the Stuff article is dated just last month and shows the Eiffel Tower in Paris, France, with a thermometer. Just like the heatwave scare a few months ago, someone read a thermometer, on a tiled roof, that is not part of the official network is proof of climate change?
Great stuff Lord Monckton!
Please keep us informed of any successes and activities.
If I had a significant academic degree in climate science or something related I would volunteer my signature. Unfortunately my degree is in economics.
Cheers
Roger
In relation to this paragraph in the article:
The Group will also establish friendly relations with other independent-minded entities worldwide that are dedicated to the advancement of true science free of totalitarian taint:
Philipp Welte points out the importance of keeping the existence and culture of the about 600 publishers in Germany going, in order to combat the widespread fake news, the democracy and the political influence of Google, Amazon and Facebook. Google’s advert revenue in 2018 in Germany was EUR 4*10^12, where as the 22000 journalists at German publishers had a revenue of EUR 800*10^6.
Here he speaks at the Publisher Congress:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1HUMf5gKxJQ
It is about 20 min and the first 15min are his own words, then the last 5min is commented in German. But, the first 15min are really fascinating.
Okay, science is starting to get its pants on.
I would also like to get updates. Since the group will have an online presence, why can’t they add a non-scientist subscription option?; with an option to receive email updates.
Thanks for investing brain power against the mindless climate hype.
I get afraid when I see the kind of aggressive mobs on the street manifesting their frustrations towards their own society, using climate change as pretext to be against their own base of existence: economy, wealth, growth and activity.
I get sad when I see children being abused in a children’s crusade, being indoctrinated and filled with hatred, worse than it was done in communist or in fascist societies.
Let us concentrate on a responsible way of producing and consuming. Let us break down governmental regulations that frustrate initiatives for making earth a better place. And let us clean up our own homes first before we pretend to want to clean up our neighbor’s houses.
This part of the initiative intrigues me and seems just as important as the effort to address erroneous publications and press releases. “Traditional” K-12 schools and universities have become bastions of climate science and are now expected to propagate and contribute to the movement which has codified the notions that CO2 is a pollutant causing the Earth to warm dangerously, and that humans are to blame.
Last week Caltech announced it is receiving a $750 million gift, the second largest donation ever given to a university, to “enhance and scale research on sustainability.”
It appears that skeptics of “anthropogenic climate change science” cannot keep pace with these kinds of gifts and their enforcement of climate science dogma in traditional classrooms. However, alternative technologies are evolving to allow sound, structured science curricula to be presented. One might hope that the signatories to the statement above, many of whom are educators, will give us a series of “Great Courses”, and that these will be archived. Such courses, as much as the p.r. efforts suggested in the bullet points of the opening post, will be necessary to debunk the ongoing misconceptions targeting school aged youngsters from the left. The facts must be continually re-asserted. But arguments and reasons must be developed and presented in context. Ideally, students would receive classroom credit, and the individual lectures would be cataloged and saved for re-listening. Such classes could be free or feed.
I hope you follow through with your educational initiative, though I would argue against the imposition of strict penalties on dissenters unless they disrupt the learning environment for others. Freedom of speech must tolerate questioners.
At last! Some logical debate on both sides of the climate change argument. Let’s hope all minds are open to accepting a different opinion.
Maybe enough luminaries can light up the world without heating up the planet.
I am indescribably happy to see this initiative get off the ground. Let’s hope it can help to reverse some of the mass brainwashing of our children. They are so full of anxiety about the future of the world. It is criminal what these people have done to pretty much an entire generation.
Fantastic news . The world just got saved and it didn’t even take 12 years .
Thank You Thank You all scientists for stepping up !!
They got away with it far to long .
The sheet just got pulled off in front of the wizard of oz pretender .
And hey kids you heard it …. NO Climate Emergency . The Scientists said so . 500 hundred of them and growing .
That other talk was just to try and scare you . The rest of us adults apologize for what you were put through .
We still need to work on protecting the environment but we can do it .
We are lucky to be in a warming cycle but it will still snow still where it normally does .
PS: The polar bears are just fine .
You realize most of these scientists are writers, engineers, or geologist with no history in climate science, right? Most also come from right-wing think-tanks funded by the fossil fuel industry
Still, if 500 scientists is enough to convince you then I can give you a couple thousand that agree man is driving global warming.
https://skepticalscience.com/joint-statements-on-climate-change-from-nas-around-world.html
https://skepticalscience.com/denier-5-arguments-to-eu-un-leaders.html
The idea that “CO2 isn’t a pollutant because it’s plant food” is also laughably unscientific. Fertilizer is plant food, it’s also a regulated pollutant because if traces get into your water supply, it will kill you. If you dump to much into the environment it will kill most plant life. Also, most species of plants DO NOT experience boosted growth from increasing CO2 levels, the few that do only do so in greenhouse lab settings. If a few plants do experience boosted growth, they’ll consume more water and soil nutrients. Which in turn will crowd out and kill out other plant species, which will shatter food chains, drain the soil and water table, and lead toward eventual desertification.
https://skepticalscience.com/co2-plant-food-advanced.htm
Thanks, Sean, for bringing some actual facts into this extremely misguided post and discussion. The science is clear: climate change is happening, it is caused by humans and in many aspects is progressing faster than predicted. Backed by actual measurements.
Walker
You r clueless as to why climate change is happening. Click on my name to understand the occurrence of natural climate change. This had been occurring like time immemorial?
Could you please do a detailed rebuttal to David Attenboroughs Netflix Scare documentary. Thanks
But how do you convince people? You know, many people hate some large companies.