To quote a Facebook friend of mine: Yawn.
More than 11,000 scientists endorse six steps to address climate emergency
University of Sydney
A global team of scientists including Dr Thomas Newsome at the University of Sydney and international colleagues has warned that “untold human suffering” is unavoidable without deep and lasting shifts in human activities that contribute to greenhouse gas emissions and other factors related to climate change.
The declaration is based on scientific analysis of more than 40 years of publicly available data covering a broad range of measures, including energy use, surface temperature, population growth, land clearing, deforestation, polar ice mass, fertility rates, gross domestic product and carbon emissions.
“Scientists have a moral obligation to warn humanity of any great threat,” said Dr Newsome from the School of Life and Environment Sciences. “From the data we have, it is clear we are facing a climate emergency.”
In a paper published today in BioScience, the authors from the University of Sydney, Oregon State University, University of Cape Town and Tufts University, along with more than 11,000 scientist signatories from 153 countries, declare a climate emergency, present data showing trends as benchmarks against which to measure progress and outline six areas of action to mitigate the worst effects of a human-induced climate change.
“Despite 40 years of major global negotiations, we have generally conducted business as usual and are essentially failing to address this crisis,” said Professor William Ripple, distinguished professor of ecology in the Oregon State University College of Forestry and co-lead author of the paper. “Climate change has arrived and is accelerating faster than many scientists expected.”
Dr Newsome said that measuring global surface temperatures will continue to remain important. However, he said that a “broader set of indicators should be monitored, including human population growth, meat consumption, tree-cover loss, energy consumption, fossil-fuel subsidies and annual economic losses to extreme weather events”.
He said the indicators are intended to be useful for the public, policymakers and the business community to track progress over time.
“While things are bad, all is not hopeless. We can take steps to address the climate emergency,” Dr Newsome said.
The scientists point to six areas in which humanity should take immediate steps to slow down the effects of a warming planet:
- Energy. Implement massive conservation practices; replace fossil fuels with clean renewables; leave remaining stocks of fossil fuels in the ground; eliminate subsidies to fossil fuel companies; and impose carbon fees that are high enough to restrain the use of fossil fuels.
- Short-lived pollutants. Swiftly cut emissions of methane, hydrofluorocarbons, soot and other short-lived climate pollutants. This has the potential to reduce the short-term warming trend by more than 50 percent over the next few decades.
- Nature. Restrain massive land clearing. Restore and protect ecosystems such as forests, grasslands and mangroves, which would greatly contribute to the sequestration of atmospheric carbon dioxide, a key greenhouse gas.
- Food. Eat mostly plants and consume fewer animal products. This dietary shift would significantly reduce emissions of methane and other greenhouse gases and free up agricultural lands for growing human food rather than livestock feed. Reducing food waste is also critical – the scientists say at least one-third of all food produced ends up as garbage.
- Economy. Convert the economy’s reliance on carbon fuels to address human dependence on the biosphere. Shift goals away from the growth of gross domestic product and the pursuit of affluence. Curtail the extraction of materials and exploitation of ecosystems to maintain long-term biosphere sustainability.
- Population. Stabilise global population, which is increasing by more than 200,000 people a day, using approaches that ensure social and economic justice.
The paper states: “Mitigating and adapting to climate change means transforming the ways we govern, manage, eat, and fulfil material and energy requirements.
“We are encouraged by a recent global surge of concern – governments adopting new policies; schoolchildren striking; lawsuits proceeding; and grassroots citizen movements demanding change.
“As scientists, we urge widespread use of the vital signs and hope the graphical indicators will better allow policymakers and the public to understand the magnitude of the crisis, realign priorities and track progress.”
The graphs illustrate how climate-change indicators and factors have changed over the past 40 years, since scientists from 50 nations met at the First World Climate Conference in Geneva in 1979.
In the ensuing decades, multiple other global assemblies have agreed that urgent action is necessary, but greenhouse gas emissions are still rapidly rising. Other ominous signs from human activities include sustained increases in per-capita meat production, global tree cover loss and number of airline passengers.
There are also some encouraging signs – including decreases in global birth rates and decelerated forest loss in the Brazilian Amazon and increases in wind and solar power – but even those are tinged with worry.
The decline in birth rates has slowed over the last 20 years, for example, and the pace of Amazon forest loss may be starting to increase again.
“Global surface temperature, ocean heat content, extreme weather and its costs, sea level, ocean acidity and land area are all rising,” Professor Ripple said.
“Ice is rapidly disappearing as shown by declining trends in minimum summer Arctic sea ice, Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets, and glacier thickness. All of these rapid changes highlight the urgent need for action.”
###
Joining Dr Newsome and Professor Ripple are co-lead author Dr Christopher Wolf, a postdoctoral scholar in the Oregon State University College of Forestry; Dr Phoebe Barnard of the Biological Conservation Institute and the University of Cape Town; and Emeritus Professor William Moomaw of Tufts University.
MULTIMEDIA
VIDEO explainer of the climate emergency declaration.
Available in 16:9 and square ratios, with or without subtitles.
Download at this link.
PHOTOGRAPHS of Dr Thomas Newsome and PDF of research at this link.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
x
The beatings will continue until morale improves.
As a scientist in the applied sciences, I have a morale obligation to warn people that these 11,000 academics are charlatans that don’t appear to have a firm grasp on the fundamentals of physics.
11,000 Academics proclaim that by the year 2100, 98% of the current population will be dead from
climate changesomethingTry old age. Since 2100 will be 81 years from now that is a good bet even if they extend life expectancy to 100 years of age.
Nice use of life insurance actuarial tables.
On a long enough time line, the survival rate of everyone drops to zero.
And not one of their trend lines has uncertainty bounds. The 2-sigma uncertainty bars would blacken the entire interior of their “Surface Temperature Change” plot.
They also seem to have no grasp of significant figures.
Also, I’ve investigated “fossil fuel subsidies” and their 3-500 billion $ per year in Figure 1 is a total crock. That number includes the so-called social cost of carbon as a subsidy.
And their Figure 2 shows a rapid increase in extreme weather events, while the WUWT extreme weather page here shows no increase at all in the extreme weather data.
I thought the IPCC themselves agreed there wasn’t much in the increasing extreme weather events and that there was no real evidence that extreme weather events were costing more money to clear up?
If they were scientists they would not refer to carbon dioxide as “carbon”.
Ditto.
It’s like the problem is a matter of will power to these people, and not economics and physics.
This petition bets the above petition as it is signed by more scientists and is supported by the observations and analysis
Here is a petition signed by 31,487 scientists that:
http://www.petitionproject.org/There is no CAGW. And the warming and CO2 increase is mainly beneficial.
There is no convincing scientific evidence that man made increases in CO2, Methane, or other greenhouse gas is causing or will in foreseeable future will cause catastrophic heating of the earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the climate.
More over the is substantial evidence that the increase in carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects on plants and animal environments of the earth.
Note that there isn’t the slightest concern for the ‘untold human suffering’ their own policy recommendations would inflict.
Talk about narcissism.
But all is to be done “using approaches that ensure social and economic justice” (#6 above). So it’s OK.
Yes. And isn’t it easy to rationalize when one lives in academia – safe from being confronted by the actual real-world?
Translation: institute tyranny.
Oh the horror! That is, the horror that any ‘scientist’ would use phrases such as;
“approaches that ensure social and economic justice.”
Only social ‘scientists’ climate change ‘scientists’ climate change activists, Marxists and the liberal left media would use such psychosocial-babble phrases in a scientific report.
Bingo!
“approaches that ensure social and economic justice.”
Translated to mean the Beta Chimps want to take over from the Alpha’s ?
Hey… I am very much on the Left, a Marxist (one that has studied extensively the works Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels) and I would never, ever, use such a silly unscientific language. For a start, scientists do not confuse «Science» with «Social Engineering». And this whole «global warming» (or «climate change» as they define it) is the product of Mathusianism (in a renewed version, of course) whereas Marx and Engels never doubted humankind’s capabilities to adjust to Nature. In fact they highly criticised (and were sarcastic) about the «doomsday» projections of Thomas Malthus. As they would be todat about «Al Gore & Cº»…
I’ve just looked at the list of signatories in the supplemental file S2 and there is a;
“Mouse, Micky Professor Micky Mouse Institute for the Blind Namibia”.
I kid you not! Take a look for yourself.
https://academic.oup.com/bioscience/advance-article/doi/10.1093/biosci/biz088/5610806
Funny thing is Mickey Mouse is probably more capable than the whole lot of them.
LOTFLMAO!
Indeed, a highly qualified individual from an esteemed institute of learning.
Its currently unavailable. They are working of “the issue”
The headmaster of Harry potters school is also there. Who knows what else will appear
Wow, so lets live in mud houses and poo in a field, if there is to be no exraction of materials, how will the 40 thousand child slaves in the Congolese colbart mine eat? (Unisef report 2019)… That also means no batteries for solar and wind. I wonder how many of these 11 thousand scientists have families? Or is it just non whites who can not have kids? Or like david Attenborough, maybe we should all stop breathing as humans are a virus? Prince William said africans need to stop having children, maybe thats what the 11 thousand idiots meant???
Economy. Convert the economy’s reliance on carbon fuels to address human dependence on the biosphere. Shift goals away from the growth of gross domestic product and the pursuit of affluence. Curtail the extraction of materials and exploitation of ecosystems to maintain long-term biosphere sustainability.
Population. Stabilise global population, which is increasing by more than 200,000 people a day, using approaches that ensure social and economic justice.
Adobe (mud brick houses) are very efficiently insulated, and cheap to bud. Poo, composted and treated, is valuable to put on fields to maintain fertility.
And do we really have to accept that our high tech western lifestyle is dependent upon 40,000 child slaves in the Congo mines? What do you reckon their health and life expectancy is? I am sure they would eat better if we helped with tech development, education, and yes, birth control. Or do we accept that children continue as slaves so we can get technology cheap, and justify this by saying ‘how else would they eat?’
Please, be the first to move in to an African mud hut. An exchange if you will. I guarantee you mud hut dwelling Africans will gladly swap their hut for your house.
To be fair thick cob ( mud, cow shit and straw ) is not bad. Seems cool in summer and warm in winter.
Smells delicious!
Tastes like chicken!
Except no running water and no power (Usually, though I did see mud huts in rural Ethiopia that had power meters installed).
“In a paper published today in BioScience”
This is NOT A PAPER. see the link and look at the top, it’s an opinion piece with 11,000 “signatures”. It’s an opinion poll, not a scientific paper.
Issue Section:Viewpoint
Yep and we are talking about 11000 (sounds like a big number) scientists of unspecified specialities in 154 countries. If each of those countries only contained 1000 scientists each the figure of 11000 starts to look a lot less impressive.
The best use for op/ed pages is to line bird cages.
Since when did scientists suddenly become moralists?
After tbe flood God made a promise to the human race that as long as the earth remained summer and winter, cold and heat, day and night would not cease. So much for mass extinction.
Over the span of time the climate is ever changing as the geological record proves. All the data today only spans 150 years. Not even a blink in time and on the basis of that the science says catastrophic change is coming.
Personally I will take God’s promise to man over that of any scientist.
“After tbe flood God made a promise to the human race that as long as the earth remained summer and winter, cold and heat, day and night would not cease. So much for mass extinction.”
That was easy, wasn’t it. Oh to live an evidence-free life.
MarieC
I wonder how many Facebook and Twitter groupings cover the lot?
I prefer the nuclear option, for the turd world. Plus it cools the planet. sarc. off/
Tom Foley
Adobe (mud brick houses) are fine in certain circumstances however, most houses in the civilised west are not built of mud. What do you propose, we knock them all down and rebuild them? And I have no idea how you build beyond two or three stories without steel reinforcement.
And whilst poo might be fine as a fertiliser on a small scale, when one has an entire city, with no gardens, pooing in the street it gets very messy and very dangerous, think Cholera. That’s why sewage systems and treatment plants were developed, which require cheap, reliable energy to run 24/7/365.
The 40,000 child slaves in the Congo is just the tip of the iceberg. It’s not just the people but the land that’s suffering around the world. https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20150402-the-worst-place-on-earth
Fine, I hear you say, we do without all the computers and smartphones, return to wooden cutlery ban all but electric cars, shut down fossil fuels and build renewables.
In which case, the environmental and human destruction is even worse. http://www.rationaloptimist.com/blog/wind-still-making-zero-energy/
You people are the danger to humanity, not sceptics.
My neighbor has an adobe round house. The moron covered all the south facing windows because “it’s too hot in the summer” (and he’s a horder, so he needed the space to cram full of junk). The house came with electric baseboard heat which has never been used, but he has a stack of firewood to rival mine. He also runs an electric air conditioner (versus my swamp cooler). In other words, he is CLUELESS on how to properly use the house. He did not put heavy shutters for summer on the south windows, nothing. Adobe housing is useless with stupid Americans, trust me.
Adobe housing is used across the American Southwest; and not by idiots.
After my great grandfather migrated from Russia to the U.S. in 1885, he built a 12′ x 14′ sod house on the prairies of Dakota Territory where my grandfather was born. The walls were 18 inches thick. After a decade or so of income from flax & wheat, he built a two-story timbered house, which was not as well insulated from temperature extremes.
“And whilst poo might be fine as a fertiliser on a small scale, when one has an entire city, with no gardens, pooing in the street it gets very messy and very dangerous, think Cholera.”
Just think San Francisco, LA etc. They are currently conducting this experiment. I don’t know if they have cholera, yet, but they do have Hepatitis A, Typhus and rats galore plus trash everywhere to include needles, plastics and feces getting washed untreated into the storm drains and into rivers and the ocean from there. Oh, and they stink.
KcTaz. Apparently they’ve managed to have some small cholera outbreaks and Doctors are waiting for the Black Death to arrive.
In North Korea, they use human waste for fertilizer for food growing. It appears many who he escaped have LARGE, long intestinal worms.
“most houses in the civilised west are not built of mud.”
Actually, they are.
Bricks are just mud, pressed and fired in a kiln
Concrete is just powered mud with specific levels of calcium carbonate, just add water.
100% HotScot
You are welcome to come to Wales or Scotland and try living in an adobe building.
Yup. Mud tends to dissolve in the rain.
Are you telling us that the Scottish and Welsh never cut peat and stacked it into walls?
Same type of stuff as stacked sod, and straw mixed with mud.
Peat is alledged to be a tremendous storer of CO2 so, if you start. using it for homes, you are increasing CO2.
Wind farms will create more carbon dioxide, say scientists
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/energy/windpower/9889882/Wind-farms-will-create-more-carbon-dioxide-say-scientists.html
…But peat is also a massive store of carbon, described as Europe’s equivalent of the tropical rainforest. Peat bogs contain and absorb carbon in the same way as trees and plants — but in much higher quantities.
British peatland stores at least 3.2 billion tons of carbon, making it by far the country’s most important carbon sink and among the most important in the world.
Wind farms, and the miles of new roads and tracks needed to service them, damage or destroy the peat and cause significant loss of carbon to the atmosphere, where it contributes to climate change.
Writing in the scientific journal Nature, the scientists, Dr Jo Smith, Dr Dali Nayak and Prof Pete Smith, of Aberdeen University, say: “We contend that wind farms on peatlands will probably not reduce emissions …we suggest that the construction of wind farms on non-degraded peats should always be avoided…”
Funny, I never seem to see those pushing for others to live in squalor and mud huts lead the way. There is nothing romantic about having rodents living in your roof dropping feces and themselves on you while you eat or sleep, nor catching malaria and a host of other diseases because mud homes don’t really keep the insects out. Chesterton’s fence?
Apparently so. By the way, are you including China when you say “western lifestyle”? Or do you leave them out because they are already the enlightened Communists and thus have no sin?
Lets say that you were the World Tyrant for the day and declared that the mines in Congo would be closed and everyone loses their means to earn a living. You prefer starvation and unemployment – that goes a long way to short-circuit health and life expectancy? When you say “slavery” are you saying that the people in the mines are in chains and under the threat of violence or incarceration if they don’t show up on the job site? Or are you abusing the language for rhetorical points?
Oh, you have a solution…
Brilliant, murder them off with birth control, and the few that remain give them educations in post-modernism, Medieval French lesbian poetry and gender studies. And we can’t leave out “tech development” which probably needs minerals from those closed mines which you claim are integral fo “cheap technology”. I’m not sure how they will “eat better” with that education and nothing to do. And who underwrites all of these gifts? Do they appear ex nihilo or do you confiscate the wealth and income from Producers in “western civilziation” creating slaves out of them (to use your definition of “slave”).
Under your plan (actually Margaret Sanger’s) there are no children, these undesirables are murdered off.
You do make reference to eating a lot, highly educated, but unemployed, barren and living in a mud hut presumably doing nothing more than eating.
What a life (well, not for those killed off). If it wasn’t for the evil “western civilization” and “cheap technology” we would have that highly desirable stone age lifestyle.
AWG
Bravo, absolutely brilliant reply 😀👍
Well, Fred was always very smug that he had the nicest stone house around. Barney seemed to concerned with keeping bamm bamm from knocking up pebbles as the local constabulary was going to charge him with a climate crime for having children.
All in all, Hanna-Barbera at least understood that living in stone houses was good enough for a comic strip. Too bad these jokers that publish this stuff won’t restrict themselves to just reading comics.
Let’s also notice that children working in cobalt mines comes after 60 years and trillions of $ in aid to Africa. What has improved?
I suspect Frederick Douglass’ approach is best. Leave them alone to find their way.
Where do you sign up for the medieval French lesbian poetry course – it sounds a whole lot more interesting than more bullshit alarm from environmentalists and eco-warrior right-on scientists ?
I expect a BBC series soon.
well until the usa allows birth control as part of their supposed health outreach for the O/seas women their birthrates going to stay or rise. AIDS still cleans up too many african women so kids without mums..end up as slaves in mines or child sex for the girls.
instead of fearmongering climate crap money could be FAR better used(as well as “scientists work”) fixing those issues.
maybe some reliable power to pump/filter clean water run a cooker and a fridge?
nah too easy and not in the agenda
Birth control is not accepted in many of these countries. Poverty is the biggest contributor to high birth rates, so expecting to make this work in reverse in pretty much insane.
“ Poverty is the biggest contributor to high birth rates, ”
But, but, …. is not a high birth rate the biggest contributor to poverty?
Thus, the literal fact is, social norms are both the biggest contributor to high birth rates and to poverty, …… to wit:
“ From a sociological perspective, social norms are informal understandings that govern the behavior of members of a society.
Social norms are regarded as collective representations of acceptable group conduct as well as individual perceptions of particular group conduct. ”
And the best, indeed only, solution to poverty is capitalism….well, the only one that actually works to be acurate.
Sheri,
Very true.
Analysis: UN claims a million species face extinction? Time to burn fossil fuels to save them! – ‘Best way to save wilderness is to increase the GDP of those in poverty’
http://bit.ly/2LsoW49
Increasing a nation’s GDP always leads to lower birth rates. If these ppl. are serious, they would concentrate on making poor nations wealthy and, to do that, they need reliable 24/7 fossil fuel electricity.
Even if your country is poor if you educate women the birth rate drops
Women become valued as they can contribute more economically…often as small traders [while the men sit around and smoke or chew the local mild narcotic].
The US taxpayer funds contraceptives for the Third World programs without limit. What we do not fund is dismemberment of human beings. (At least until and unless the next Democrat genocidal government gets into power.)
Birth control is not “health care.” It does not prevent any disease, and does not cure any disease. Same with abortion. Sorry to break the news to you.
“Birth control” for some is a medical way to achieve a lifestyle choice. Similar to the way I might use Viagra to improve …well… or have a nose job to change my physical appearance, or get a tattoo.
Yes, it includes a medication, and a prescriber. But that does not make it “health care.”
Labeling “BC” as “health care” is a political move for Western imperialism, and a marketing strategy for Big Pharma.
Someone tell me: what is the problem with more people? We had a post-WWII population boom, and economic boom here in the USA. Annual per-person productivity has steadily risen ever since. More people does not equal weaker national economy. Unless the population of Africa threatens the economic forecast of the USA.
Which is behind much of this clamoring for “population control:” review NSSM 200. I note that because it is disgusting to believe that killing people off, and controlling how many children any couple should have is some great foreign policy strategy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Study_Memorandum_200
Birth control most certainly is “health care.” Preventing death is one of the main goals of health care: https://www.indexmundi.com/g/r.aspx?v=2223
“Same with abortion” …. Gee, I guess you’ve never heard of an ectopic pregnancy.
“It does not prevent any disease” Using condoms prevents the spread of most STDs.
If an unborn fetus can feel the pain of being aborted, ….. how in the world does said fetus survive its trip through the “birth canal” without feeling similar pain to that which its mother feels when birthing it?
Samual,
You are seriously comparing being sliced and diced in the womb to the short trip through the birth canal?
I’ve had two children. One was crying .One came out quite happy. I was at the birth of one of my granddaughters who also came into the world quite happy. It’s rather obvious to any mother that a baby is not permanently traumatized by being born while ultra sounds show an abortion is painful and permanent.
KcTaz, how does an ultrasound show pain?
KcTaz, so when the Dr./Gynecologist has to use forceps and tug hard as ell …. and the mother screaming her lungs out due to the pain of forcing a 6 pound baby through a 4 pound birth canal ……. the kid comes out laughing and smiling and don’t need to be held up by its feet to drain its lungs and its butt spanked to get it to start breathing.
KcTaz, ….. why don’tja post a “link” to an ultra sound of a “birth canal” trip so everyone can witness a “happy, smiling” baby being born.
Boy are you living in the `70’s. Birth rates art dropping all over the world. In the developed world less than needed to maintain the population. (we will be feeling the effect here in the USA in less than a decade) And in most of the “third world”, the fertility rate is down to 2.7 (2.1 is what is needed to maintain population) and dropping.
If the Chinese hadn’t enforced demographic measures, they wouldn’t be where they are now. The crucial point is number 6. If this is addressed, the rest will not be so acute. As for measures 2 and 4: humans do not have the digestive tract of primates. Livestock is the only means to generate food from millions of square miles of grassland. The greenhouse gases generated come from bacterial nitrification of plant matter. This takes place either in the livestock or in the ground later. Little additionnal GHG is generated. When people talk about how much liter drinking water per kg of meat is used: that water also goes back to the ecosystem and is not destroyed. If one wants consequence: why should humans starve and livestock be reduced when nobody mentions the millions of household pets, mainly cats and dogs and their “contributions” to the ecosystem?
@ur momisugly Eric Vieira
“When people talk about how much liter drinking water per kg of meat is used:”
Right on, Eric.
You should see the reaction when I tell people that the reason California often has a “water shortage” is because they are shipping so much of it out-of-state in the billions of pounds of fruits, vegetable and nuts that are sold in every other State in America.
Yup!
In addition the Mehtane molecule is one Carbon atom which breaks down after a 12…no sorry 7….no sorry again….5…..um well maybe it’s only 3 years in the atmosphere (IPCC narrative) to produce CO2 (one atom of C) and water – both of which are then used by the plant to produce sugars (and proteins.) So, essententially, Methane is in equilibrium as far as a GHG is concerned and is NOT a contributor to any increase in ‘global warming’
Note that even the IPCC admits this although not publicly. The reduction in their estimate of the life cycle of Methane in the atmosphere has not changed the climate models.
So your solution for child slaves mining the raw materials for our high tech modern lifestyle is …. more tech?
You can’t have it both ways. Either our modern technological lifestyle is a climate sin or it is not.
Nothing is going to help those kids as long as their governments are run by corrupt kleptocrats backed by the very same oligarchs who make their money mining raw materials for western tech companies. Also, let’s not forget that the renewable energy industry is one of the biggest sources of income for those mining companies. All those windmills and solar panels they build require a bunch of raw materials mined in underdeveloped countries.
The problem of child slavery is not technology, it’s the barbaric governments (if they exist at all) that allow/encourage it.
Focus on the real problems instead of scapegoating the world for wanting progress.
Many parts of Africa cannot sustain crops of any kind but various hard grasses survive. That is why cattle are so important to African tribes they graze over large areas and provide much needed protein to people who would otherwise starve. Of course some dumb ozzie would have no knowledge of that. The article reads like it was written by a 12 year old, with little understanding of the real world and the loony “six steps” have clearly not been thought through! For example if the entire UK was covered in these clunking wind turbines, they would only provide 30% of the UK’s power needs. And power stations – coal or atomic or gas – would have to be kept up and fired 24/7 for when the wind doesn’t blow – or when it blows too hard and Sancha Panza’s windmills have to be shut down. Growing vegetables is highly mechanised agriculture – ploughing, planting, spreading fertilizer, making fertilizer, croop spraying by aircraft, pumping water for irrigation, making and spraying insectisides, harvesting…… a huge carbon footprint. If this Newsome fellow’s intelligence is typical of other “climate scientists” then no wonder sensible people question their dodgy computer models and predictions. It seems Thomas knew some – but not enough.
“our high tech western lifestyle is dependent upon 40,000 child slaves in the Congo mines”
Those child slaves are mining the Cobalt needed for Wind Turbines and cellphones.
One single modern large wind turbine also needs 600 tons of coal to make the steel for the base and tower.
That’s one the problems with alternative energies. They’re so polluting, expensive and wasteful.
Life expectancy in the Congo is about 20 years longer than it was 50 years ago before those “child slaves” began mining cobalt. You want to improve their lives, go fund some water well drilling and infrastructure development for them, but the developed world has no obligation to go around building nations.
Absolutely no one is stopping you from pursuing that way of living.
I suspect you won’tfor the same reasons no one else wants to. Until people who believe the world is in a crisis start living like it is – and either living in a way that would help lessen the ‘problem’, OR preparing for a future of disasters – then you have no credibility.
If I believed earth was going tits-up, I would purchase a piece of property that has a large cave (such properties exist near me), and begin converting it to a well-stocked abode: food, water, med supplies, solar panels, waterproofing, method of heating, etc.), NOT jetting around the world climate meetings or buying beachfront property.
So when will construction start on your adobe hut?
More money, is their mantra. Then they will save us!
“so lets live in mud houses and poo in a field, “
That would be a trade up for many folks in San Francisco.
good luck with any efforts to stop the birthrates in africa and the mid east and islands
Nguinea men have been cutting their wives arms to remove the birth control implants as they see more kids are a sign of their virility
the fact the kids and mums are lucky to survive or prosper and be healthy doesnt matter to them.
as for the title article
yeah
amazing timing isnt it?
hours after Trump announced the flick to the fwench..
ABC radio started the spin at 6am news by 8am I wanted to reach in and strangle em
Im trying to see if i can locate the AndrewBolt skynews fightback
no tv so I hope its online, I need some good cheer
Sunny November 6, 2019 at 2:18 am
“I wonder how many of these 11 thousand scientists have families? ”
A better question to ask might be ……..
“I wonder how many of those 11 thousand scientists have or applied for “non-repayable” Government Grants? ”
It appears from below that the proper question is, how many of the 11,000 scientists are scientists.
In similar lists of climate alarmist “scientists” I see that many of them are biologists. I have always assumed that biology is a science. But biologists should not opine about climate unless they also studied physics and statistics and geology, at least.
“Sunny November 6, 2019 at 2:18 am
Wow, so lets live in mud houses and poo in a field…”
Look out, the NIMF* folks will be up in arms!
*Not In My Field”
/grin
You said it, Charles : Yawn.
2, 3 and 6 are sensible.
Not convinced by 1, 4 and 5….
Look at the list of “scientists”. Not many in the hard sciences, but I guess in “climate science” all you need is art.
Please can someone post a link to the list.
https://scientistswarning.forestry.oregonstate.edu/sites/sw/files/climate%20emergency%20Ripple%20et%20al.pdf
The majority appear to be students in ecology studies or environmental justice. Probably told to sign or flunk.
If there was a list of signatories at that link, it’s not there now. I wonder how many signatures they have after removing Mr. Mouse et al?
Completely agree. The lead author (Newsome) isn’t even a Prof, he’s a lecturer in environmental science. Then you have a post doc in forestry (Wolf), and two policy people. If you actually look at the list of 11,000 a lot of them are students. Also note they listed media contacts for interviews. It;’s just propaganda.
Including one Mouse, Mickey, a Professor at the “Mickey Mouse Institute For the Blind” and a ‘student’ at the Suez Canal University
I’m surprised they didn’t get any signatures from the Derek Zoolander School for Kids Who Can’t Read Too Good and Want to do Other Stuff Good Too
A few Zoologists no Zoolander but if you do a Google search on some of the names with Phd’s you get that person but pick some of the ones that just have the name and province you get zero results .
The title of the article should be “11,000 Soft Scientists Want to Make Sure They Have Jobs After Getting Out of School”.
Begs the question? Was Thomas Malthus a vegan, or a vegetarian…_
This “climate” movement (which by its extremism is now marginalizing to the fringe outside of the chattering classes) is resembling a Malthusian death cult more every day. They sound like Luddites afraid to live in the modern world, raving about some Edenic past that never existed.
Their fears have no reality. They are an empty narrative, nothing more. Most people look at them as just plain nuts. The important part is to teach your kids not to listen to their claptrap. The most convincing argument is a synopsis of 50 years of their failed silly predictions.
Of course Dr. Micky Mouse is one of the signatories. The petition was an on line petition that does no appear to have had an checking of the “signatories.
LOL classic signatory. At least he was from the “Institute for the Blind” .
If only Dr. Duck, professor at the Institute for the Dumb had signed. In any case, Dr. Mouse is probably the most famous of the signatories.
Lord Dumbledore is in there too
“Of course Dr. Micky Mouse is one of the signatories” Like the Oregon petition which was signed by Hawkeye Pearce
More tripe from Australia. Read the comments here;
https://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/untold-suffering-global-scientists-warn-of-climate-emergency-20191105-p537mt.html
How good is Australia?
got the page but ZERO comments?
have they removed it?
Go to the bottom of the page
All SMH articles that have comments sections are all geared for tablets and mobiles, so if on a PC and a typical browser, it is really frustrating to navigate. As Gerald Marquardt November 6, 2019 at 5:41 am says, you have to go to the bottom of the page, and sometimes you have to scroll twice or more because of the way the page is setup.
Dr Thomas Newsome, climate scientists.
https://sydney.edu.au/science/about/our-people/academic-staff/thomas-newsome.html
studies dingos..ffs
theyve done fine for thousands of yrs without researchers
and anyone know who this mob are?
listed at the bottom of adelaide news article on same…
Oregon-based non-profit The Worthy Garden club, a collective of business owners, entrepreneurs, energy specialists, agriculturists, scientists, and astronomers, provided partial support for the research.
Reading the titles of his authored papers it sounds like he wants the dingo to eat your baby.
At age 78 I cannot name a single aspect of “climate change” that has worsened, made me feel uncomfortable, threatened me, worried me .. or has any of these implications for our children and theirs.
If we are approaching a crisis, then strange crisis it is. Hundreds of detriments have been forecast over the last 40 years, yet none of them has happened yet.
They are supposed to all come out of the woodwork, these hundreds of threats, at some future time, to bite me on the bum.
What unbelievable scenarios are thrust upon us.
Has anyone here been harmed by climate change? Do tell us how, when and how bad it was. Geoff S
Well said, Geoff.
I grew up in a hot semi-desert area. I was struck by the journals of a Scot, a gardener who lived there from 1820-1870. His comments on the weather and climate and his temperature records indicate heat and drought that equals or even exceeds that of today. Yet the alarmists are claiming that this area is experiencing the worst of climate change. These alarmists want us to listen to a sixteen year old but ignore the insights of those who have been around for seven or more decades.
Geoff – it is always a catastrophe in the future, or for someone else.
That is the game. Make me feel guilty ans responsible for someone on the other side of the globe. Or, more often, a hypothetical. “What about the kid who…” “What about the single mom who…” What about the ….” –These Jesus-Complex Progs want us to engineer the world around a few hypotheticals. As long as their ego is satisfied and they get the money and power.
So we know which useless 11,000 ‘scientists’ to sack. Millions of proper scientists disagree.
THAT there were 11,000 of them, heavily reinforces Cook’s “Consensus”.
This needs shredding – the headline, standing alone, gives governments all the justification they need to just keep on keeping-on. And we know the study is rubbish, but the proles don’t – “Keep those cards and letters – AND donations, AND votes – coming in!” Which was likely the point of the study; wonder who funded it?
“This needs shredding – the headline, standing alone, gives governments all the justification they need to just keep on keeping-on.”
Yes, this misrepresentation needs a thorough debunking. You can bet it will be cited by the alarmists. They won’t tell you Micky Mouse is one of those signing the form. This is just another attempt to fool the public into believing something for which there is no evidence: Human-caused climate change.
Imagine the Mouseketeers speliing out Mickey’s name: M-I-C, K-E-Y M-O-U-S-E. Mickey Mouse!
Now he’s a climate scientist!
– Which is only fair – he’s at least as well-credentialed, and at least as expert in climate science as the rest of them…
BTW, it was ‘MICKY’ Mouse, not Mickey Mouse; hopefully this satisfies any doubts you had about his bona fides /sarc
Short-lived pollutants. Swiftly cut emissions of methane, … This has the potential to reduce the short-term warming trend by more than 50 percent over the next few decades.
Beware of carefully constructed misdirection.
Somehow we encouraged these barmy zealot’s.
Where did we go wrong?
We didn’t cull fast and often, it’s like bushfire prevention you need to keep ontop of it.
Political science —: An oxymoron.
But Political Engineering is plain murder. The Excess Winter Mortality in the UK alone is approx 40,000 old folks who by and large, could not afford to heat their freezing homes. Every year a 1000 times more Grandparents die in their homes than the 39 poor fools who were killed in that closed up truck.
The damned Pols and the corrupt Scienteers need to be made to face the truth.
I went through the list of “scientists” from ‘A’ to ‘B’. Not one described himself as a “Climate Scientist”. I think one could delete the ‘students, even the Phd Students, and some of the others could hardly be described as a ‘scientist’ in the “Climate Science field”. Certainly not the “Ethnomusicologist.
In other words, someone has scraped together a list of people vaguely in a scientific area who have been persuaded to put their names to a list supposedly purporting to promote ideas to “save the planet'”.
Is this perhaps the list of 11 000 people who were asked their views on Climate Catastrophe, of whom only 3000 bothered to reply, and of whom only about 77 of 79 agreed fully with the view that “something must be done?” The list that produced the totally fictional 97% of scientists agree?
One does not need to be a “climate scientist” to have real understanding of climate and weather. Take someone who has been farming for fifty years on the family farm where they have kept a meticulous record for generations. This has enabled them to farm successfully by being observant and adapting to all kinds of weather. To him it is a joke thinking we can predict ahead and engineer the climate to conform to some magical number.
This is very true. A few years ago I was clearing my Mum’s path of snow for the second time in a week or so and stopped to chat to a local farmer. I just happened to mention that I was desperately trying to clear the path so that it didn’t get chance to freeze. He told me that it wouldn’t settle for long as it wasn’t that type of snow and conditions and that it would be gone in a couple of days. He was bang on and when I asked him how he knew, he said it was just experience- something that you had to develop over the years as your livelihood depended on it.
Andy, thanks for this good example. I hope many will follow your lead by giving other examples of people with astute observation and careful reasoning that trump the “climate experts.”
This is also precisely why engineers – who are interested in getting things to work properly – view the “alarmist climate claims” differently from the academics busy with computer models – that do not work!
Dr Newsome said that measuring global surface temperatures will continue to remain important. However, he said that a “broader set of indicators should be monitored, including human population growth, meat consumption, tree-cover loss, energy consumption, fossil-fuel subsidies and annual economic losses to extreme weather events”.
First. Surface temperature changes are an artifact of tree-cover gain. The greening of the planet is well documented, the effects of albedo well established and non controversial.
Second. Several of these “broad indicators” are simply besides the point and/or flat wrong.
What difference does the population make? None. Only a sick millie, historic illiterate, Hitler youth, or communist, would resort to population controls. My prescription for Newsome is a season or two spent studying The World At War on a local PBS channel, to dispel himself of sick eugenic delusions.
Third. The world’s tree cover has steadily increased as wood has given way to steel as the main building material, not just from trees not being harvested, but also from co2 fertilization from the milling of steel.
Four. There is no such thing as a fossil fuel subsidy. At every point from the exploration, extraction, refinement, delivery and end user sale, energy is taxed and taxed and taxed some more so that the exorbitant sum hided from we working stiffs holds no relation to the actual cost of producing the stuff.
Five. Economic losses due to extreme weather events are steadily decreasing due to better forecasting.
Everything this dude spouts is ugly or just wrong. There should be a tax for being that consistently wrong. And their should be civil code against being that ugly, with fines and prison terms.
The “broad indicators” will be used when we start cooling.
Australian ABC network was pushing this story today and then had Ross Garnaut on pushing his new book. The comment of the morning came from a caller who rang in and asked had the ABC been taken over by XR people?
The on-air host said it was a new worthy item because it was 11 thousand scientists the caller then quipped well 11 Million of us voted the other way mate and we pay your wages and probably all the Australian scientists who signed this junk. He then asked what deal Ross Garnaut had got to get to push his book on a public broadcaster at the taxpayers expense. It was quite funny listening to the host squirm.
damn I missed that!
woulda made my day
as for Garnaut..I hoped hes kicked the bucket
that mans responsible for far too much policy with his shit reports prior
shoulda known better
hes an abc fave as is whining steffen and flimflam
“global tree cover loss”
Global greening is happening faster than climate change, and it’s a good thing
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/07/05/global-greening-is-happening-faster-than-climate-change-and-its-a-good-thing/
We should not eat the animals, it is better the animals only eat each other – maybe.
The whole thing is just a political paper disguised as scientific. The tragic thing is that many or maybe even most people will adopt this as scientifically coherent and going along with it as long as they have the prosperity to do so.
Saw a report the other day spinning rapid tree growth as a climate problem due to increased water use expiration of water vapour. Seems disaster can be confected from anything. Plants grow therefore doom, apparently.
“From the data we have, it is clear we are facing a climate emergency.” Show us your data.
Uhm, they are still altering the data.
The cannot show the data:
They meant to say “From the data we had. …” See, the dog has eaten my homework – right Dr. Mann?
““untold human suffering” is unavoidable without deep and lasting shifts in human activities that contribute to greenhouse gas emissions –‘ Well, gee whiz, maybe they could contribute some of their grants money to a fund to support people living in poverty-stricken areas.
Really, seriously, if these 11,000 science guys want to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, there is a very simple solution: if they stopped traveling/talking/breathing/whatever, that will seriously reduce greenhouse gas emissions by them. /s
As I understand it, we’re going to be sending people to Mars to colonize the place before long. Mars needs help with its own greenhouse gases problem: it has an atmosphere that is less than 1% of Earth’s, so it does not protect the planet from the Sun’s radiation nor does it do much to retain heat at the surface. It consists of 95% carbon dioxide, 3% nitrogen, 1.6% argon, and the remainder is trace amounts of oxygen, water vapor, and other gases. (Source: Universe Today) See? That solves the problem nicely.
To be human is to suffer. Fossil fuels have reduced human suffering more than just about anything else I can think of.
The alarmists ignore and discount all evidence that fossil fuels have a huge beneficial effect.
Yeah, but, commieBob, it doesn’t fir their “meme”, so they have to ignore it. If they paid attention to it, they’d have panic attacks, you see, because it means admitting that they are wrong… and they can’t stand that simple fact.
I bet all are employed on taxpayers dime. Eisenhower had warned us:
“The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded
Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.”
So essentially 11000 scientists with the pocketbooks open screaming, feed me.
They haven’t actually told us what the “untold human suffering” is. It is very unusual for climate alarmists to be so shy about telling us of the wholly imaginary horrors caused by beneficial global warming
They can’t tell us because they’re as yet ‘untold’, but whatever they are they will be bad, like really, really bad- far worse than the last untold suffering last week…..
“untold human suffering’ –> No soy lattes available, no vegan-only restaurants open any more, no Snorebux cafe au soy leche – this list is endless. /s
They forgot to include using unicorn poo with all its magical properties, for example: fertilizer that quadruples crop yields and, like Australian emu salve, doesn’t stink; for making fuel cakes for cooking and illumination, and to heat those mud huts in winter, all without smoke heavy in respiratory-illness-causing particulates nor stink.
Etc.
Dr Thomas Newsome has a PhD in dingos and PostDoc’d in grey wolves. Seriously.
https://thomasnewsome.com/about-me/
I guess that’s as good a qualification as any for somebody who wants to tell the world what to do.