Photo: NoTricksZone

Remember, The British MET Called the End of Snow Last December

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

h/t Dave Gadziala; Three months ago, WUWT reported on the MET issuing a new end of snow prediction. At the time I thought it was funny; but given the catastrophic failure of the electricity grid in Texas, and soaring heating bills in Britain, perhaps it is time to reflect on how much damage the people making such predictions might be doing to people’s lives.

From December;

Climate change: Snowy UK winters could become thing of the past

By Justin Rowlatt
Chief environment correspondent
Published6 December 2020

Snowy winters could become a thing of the past as climate change affects the UK, Met Office analysis suggests.

It is one of a series of projections about how UK’s climate could change, shared with BBC Panorama.

It suggests by the 2040s most of southern England could no longer see sub-zero days. By the 2060s only high ground and northern Scotland are still likely to experience such cold days.

The projections are based on global emissions accelerating.

It could mean the end of sledging, snowmen and snowball fights, says Dr Lizzie Kendon, a senior Met Office scientist who worked on the climate projections.

“We’re saying by the end of the century much of the lying snow will have disappeared entirely except over the highest ground,” she told Panorama.

Read more:

When you ask why politicians are so poorly prepared for cold, snowy weather, why Texas never properly winterised their grid, or why British people are suffering soaring power bills in the midst of bitter cold, I don’t think you have to look far for the answer.

“People underestimate the power of models. Observational evidence is not very useful.”attributed to MET scientist John Mitchell.

So what would it take to introduce just a smidgeon of doubt into the fortress mindset of those who value models over observations? We have an answer to that question.

In 2015, then British Climate Change Secretary Amber Rudd organised a meeting between the GWPF and The Royal Society, to see if they could resolve their differences on climate science.

The Royal Society rejected the idea that observational evidence which contradicted their predictions undermined the credibility of their climate models.

“We pinned them down on this hiatus… they were arguing that yes, there might have been a hiatus, but warming might be going into the ocean, or it could be due to volcanic activity. So we asked at what point would you begin to accept there had been no warming. If there is no warming for five years, or ten years?

“Finally they conceded they would wait fifty years.

“We asked would that be fifty years from now, or fifty years from 1997, when the hiatus started? They said they wouldn’t change their mind for fifty years from now.

Read more:

This is a group of people who openly admit they are unmoved by observational evidence which contradicts their worldview.

How do you change the minds of people whose view of climate science appears to be based on blind faith in computer models, rather than observations?

The answer is you cannot. There is no penalty for alarmist climate scientists clinging to scientific ideas which are not supported by observations. Any observation which contradicts their theories is immediately dismissed as black box “natural variation” – volcanic eruptions shielding the Earth, or the ocean swallowing the missing heat. I suspect most of them will carry their conviction that the world is on the brink of runaway global warming to the grave.

What we can hope to do is convince politicians and voters to stop taking alarmist climate predictions so seriously.

Thankfully politicians in advanced societies face a regular reality check, on a much shorter timescale than the 50 years proposed by The Royal Society. And voters can be pretty unforgiving when they are left shivering alone in the cold and dark, thanks to politicians making bad decisions about power grids – regardless of whose advice politicians claim they were following.

4.9 48 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
February 22, 2021 6:12 pm

In Australia we were informed that it would never rain enough in the future for dams to be filled with water, and the Sydney Opera House would go underwater by year 2000.

Didn’t happen.

Reply to  Dennis
February 22, 2021 6:50 pm

I will be more than happy to supply snow shovels to these benighted, uninformed and seemingly unaware souls, so that they can shovel all the snow on my street alone into a large truck, which I will bring along as the receptacle of that shoveled snow.

What does it take to get them to admit to reality? The denial that they manifest so consistently is indicative of a complete disconnect from reality. They need therapy, and a few weeks of digging people out every year.

Patrick healy
Reply to  Sara
February 23, 2021 3:15 am

Thank you. Reality makes no difference when your income depends on perpetuating lies.
I spent some time this morning on 2 other great Realistic Web sites. and Lockdown Sceptics UK.
Sundance at the Tree house was relating the utter corruption of the U.S. political system up to and including the Supreme Court.
The Lockdown site is showing correspondence between Mr Ferguson – of computer modelling of the Wuhan Flu PlanDemic – fame. (Remember 20 million will die unless we impose house arrest and wear dog mussels?)
He actually says he welcomes debate – believe it or not.
He compares any one who does not subscribe to “the science” as conspiracy theorists!
Now where have we come across that before?

Patrick healy
Reply to  Patrick healy
February 23, 2021 3:16 am

Or Muzzles

Reply to  Dennis
February 22, 2021 8:48 pm

To be fair they did say the Opera House would be under water in 2000 yrs time back in 2014 But PIK is always selling the sizzle and hoping no one notices the barbecue is never going to happen

But the ‘perpetual drought’ for Australia was supposed to have arrived already, and that claim was 10 years ago

Reply to  Dennis
February 22, 2021 9:19 pm


This is an excerpt from a draft that I am sending to Canadian and American politicians and the media – but most of these fools won’t even understand it, because they have no scientific competence and have been deceived – programmed by false climate scares and green energy frauds for ~forty years.
We published in 2002 that there was no catastrophic human-made global warming / climate change crisis, and green energy schemes were not green and produced little useful (dispatchable) energy. Dangerous global warming and climate change has NOT HAPPENED and green energy schemes have proved to be COSTLY, UNRELIABLE AND INEFFECTIVE.
Global warming is not a threat, but global cooling IS dangerous. In 2002 we predicted that global cooling would start circa 2020, based on low solar activity, and that prediction is increasingly supported by the evidence.
Politicians foolishly adopted very-scary global warming falsehoods and brewed the perfect storm, crippling our energy systems with costly and unreliable green energy schemes that utterly fail due to intermittency, at a time when we will need more reliable, dispatchable energy due to increased energy demand and imminent global cooling. The good people of Britain, Germany, California and Texas have all suffered and died due to green energy failures that were predictable and predicted.
The ability to predict is the best objective measure of scientific and technical competence. Climate doomsters have a perfect NEGATIVE predictive track record – every very-scary climate prediction, of the ~50 they have made since 1982, has FAILED TO HAPPEN.
The radical Greens have NO credibility, make that NEGATIVE credibility – their only competence is the fabrication of false alarm.
Our 2002 Predictions Are Among the Most Accurate on the Planet.
In 2002, co-authors Dr Sallie Baliunas, Astrophysicist, Harvard-Smithsonian, Dr Tim Patterson, Paleoclimatologist, Carleton U, Ottawa and Allan MacRae, P.Eng. (now retired), McGill, Queens, U of Alberta, wrote:
1. “Climate science does not support the theory of catastrophic human-made global warming – the alleged warming crisis does not exist.”
2. “The ultimate agenda of pro-Kyoto advocates is to eliminate fossil fuels, but this would result in a catastrophic shortfall in global energy supply – the wasteful, inefficient energy solutions proposed by Kyoto advocates simply cannot replace fossil fuels.”
Allan MacRae published in the Calgary Herald on September 1, 2002, based on a conversation with Dr Tim Patterson:
3. “If [as we believe] solar activity is the main driver of surface temperature rather than CO2, we should begin the next cooling period by 2020 to 2030.”
MacRae updated his global cooling prediction in 2013:
3a. “I suggest global cooling starts by 2020 or sooner. Bundle up.”

February 22, 2021 9:35 pm

Global politics has now become toxic and unhinged, with the extreme-left panicking, and trying to force the neo-Marxist Great Reset on us all.
WHY NOW? Because solar-driven global cooling is upon us, and the fraud of catastrophic human-caused global warming is about to be exposed to even the most obtuse of humanity.
The Situation Assessment is described below – its perpetrators are among the most evil scoundrels on Earth, and to date they are succeeding.
For decades, climate skeptics have been correctly arguing that the science of the global warming extremists was wrong, but it was never about the science – it was always a fraud – a false scheme concocted for political and financial gain.
People give the warmist cabal too much credibility – false alarm is their tactic – the climate alarmist leaders know they are lying – they’ve known it all along.
SITUATION ASSESSMENT – first published many months ago:
It’s ALL a Marxist-Democrat scam – false enviro-hysteria including the Climate and Green-Energy frauds, the full-Gulag lockdown for Covid-19, the specious linking of these frauds (“to solve one we have to solve the other”), paid-and-planned terrorism by Antifa and BLM, and the mail-in ballot US election scam – it’s all false.
The Climate-and-Covid scares are false crises, concocted by wolves to stampede the sheep.
The tactics used by the warmist propagandists are straight out of Lenin’s playbook.

The Climategate emails provided further evidence of the warmists’ deceit – they don’t debate, they shout down dissent and seek to harm those who disagree with them – straight out of Lenin.
The purported “science” of global warming catastrophism has been disproved numerous ways over the decades. Every one of the warmists’ very-scary predictions, some 50 or so since ~1982, have failed to happen. The most objective measure of scientific competence is the ability to correctly predict – and the climate fraudsters
have been 100% wrong to date.
There is a powerful logic that says that no rational person can be this wrong, this deliberately obtuse, for this long – that they must have a covert agenda. I made this point circa 2009, and that agenda is now fully exposed – it is the Marxist totalitarian “Great Reset” – “you will own nothing, and you’ll be happy!”
The proponents of both the very-scary Global Warming / Climate Change scam and the Covid-19 Lockdown scam know they are lying. Note also how many global “leaders” quickly linked the two scams, stating ”to solve one we have to solve the other”- utter nonsense, not even plausible enough to be specious.
Regarding the sheep, especially those who inhabit our universities and governments: The sheep are well-described in the essay by Nassim Nicholas Taleb as “Intellectual-Yet-Idiot” or IYI – IYI’s hold the warmist views as absolute truths, without ever having spent significant effort to investigate them. The false warmist narrative fitted their negative worldview, and they never seriously questioned it by
examining the contrary evidence.

February 23, 2021 5:44 am


with the best will in the world, if the fools won’t understand your letter, why are you sending it?

Having spent the last 30+ years in sales and marketing (as you know) there is one thing I learned beyond doubt; for a letter to be effective, it must be read by the intended recipient.

That may sound obvious, and it is, but rarely are letters read unless they are crafted personally, and accurately targeted.

And by targeted, I mean one needs to understand the recipient. Who are they? What motivates them? What’s their objective? What’s their level of education?

For example, were I writing to The Right Honourable David Davis MP, a former Prime Ministerial Candidate, I would word it entirely differently to a letter I would send to Boris Johnson – Prime Minister.

David Davis is, at the moment, a campaigner for high dose Vitamin D use by everyone during the Coronavirus crisis. I wondered why and watched a video interview with him, and discovered he’s a scientist by education, (BSc Joint Hons Molecular Science/Computer Science 1968–1971). He was also an infantry soldier in the Territorial Army’s 21 SAS (Artists) Regiment so has both a scientific, logical mind with dogged determination. He also had a deprived background, without his father who left the family when he was a child so he’s entirely practical and grounded.

Writing a wholly scientific letter to Davis would be familiar to him and likely flatter him that someone was communicating with him on his level.

Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson is a different kettle of fish altogether. He was born into privilege, his father an academic and mother an artist. Boris won a scholarship to read Literae Humaniores at Balliol College, Oxford (an undergraduate course focused on classics – Ancient Rome, Ancient Greece, Latin, ancient Greek, and philosophy. He went on to become a Journalist (a story teller).

Boris has been married twice and is currently living with his girlfriend, ‘Princess Nut Nut’, a known rabid green and former political advisor. He is known to have flipped from being a climate sceptic to supporting the climate change movement with gusto, coincident with his association with his current girlfriend.

Boris wouldn’t recognise a scientific paper if you beat him over the head with it. He would, however, be far more interested in a more philosophical approach.

However, no letter written to a political leader will ever reach it’s destination without first passing through the hands of, possibly, many minions who will all assess it in light of their own beliefs and misconceptions.

In short, 99.9% of all letters to world leaders ends up in some dusty archive in the basement.

So, to get to a leader they must be somehow compelled to seek out your letter. That can be achieved by having it splashed simultaneously across the front page of The Times, The Telegraph, The Daily Mail and, of course, The Guardian………..

An appearance on the BBC would also help, but you have more chance of achieving the foregoing than ever getting a sympathetic audience with far left ‘Auntie’.

The other route in is via an MP (and I’m talking UK here obviously) but they are just foot soldiers and have little motivation to do anything other than a pro forma response. If the subject is beyond them, they just shuffle it up to a department in Whitehall (civil service, again rabidly far left) who send a pro forma response.

I know, I had the pro forma response from Whitehall. A shabby, blurred, squint photocopy which adequately conveyed their contempt for any mere peon who dared challenge their dogma.

There are a couple of other reasonably effective routes however. An approach by a credible scientific institute, but no chance of that as they are all on board with the scam; or a combined letter from numerous scientists, but they are usually condemned as cranks; I could go on with possible routes, but probably the best method is to identify, interest and recruit a suitable, senior political figure, who is much more accessible, and has much more chance of getting your documents in front of the right people That may well not be ‘Boris’, Trudeau, Macron or Merkle etc. but a trusted advisor who knows your target personally.

Two tactics I used regularly in Sales & Marketing – Never, ever talk to the receptionist of the company you are ‘calling’. They are the first line of defence for the Chief Exec.

Often, better than calling the Chief Exec, is calling his PA. Find out His/Her name from the receptionist and, ideally, His/Her direct dial. Ask Her/Him if it’s appropriate to write to them about your subject. He/She will of course say yes, but the point is to strike up a friendly relationship with Her/Him and treat them as the most important member of the company. If anyone can get correspondence to the Chief Exec. He/She can.

Never introduce a note of aggression into your letter. No demands, no expectations, just the simple facts with ‘possible’ alternatives. “It might be worth considering” – “perhaps I could suggest” – “this alternative has been found to work” etc. No capitals, bold text or underlining etc. unless consistent for a subject title, cite your references as footnotes (including them in the body text makes the letter look long and unappetising). If your letter is physical rather than email, hyperlinks are useless, so offer to forward your references on request. And don’t use the term ‘retired’, your qualifications are never retired.

Finally, never refer to ‘Alarmists’ or use derogatory terms for anyone or any thing. Your audience may be a closet Alarmist, or a Green, or believe in Antifa/BLM/Marxism etc. I have fallen foul of making assumptions more than once.

Everyone, but everyone, in a Business or a Government is lined up with the specific brief of not allowing we peons to communicate directly with their Lord and Master. They will find the slightest excuse to send your letter to the basement.



Richard Page
Reply to  Hotscot
February 23, 2021 7:03 am

There’s a letter been sent to the PM’s office requesting an inquiry into Carrie Symmonds unelected and unaccountable influence on the government. It questions her ability to appoint friends to high ranking government jobs and her ability to determine government policy. The Bow Group think tank have sent it, they may have one or two members in common with the GWPF.

Reply to  Richard Page
February 23, 2021 7:31 am

I’m aware of it Richard, thanks.

It’s a good example of tactics. Have a group of influential people, in this case within a recognised political pressure group, collectively endorse an objection to an issue, and make sure there is publicity, thereby forcing a response.

They have, of course, solicited a response “And Downing Street said it was “incorrect” she plays a central role.” (BBC)

Speaking on Monday, the PM’s press secretary Allegra Stratton added: “The prime minister’s fiancée is on maternity leave, she’s raising their son Wilf.” (BBC)

We’re supposed to believe that mothers raising a child are rendered mute.

Reply to  Hotscot
February 23, 2021 7:25 am

Thank you HotScot my friend – all good points.

My letters will not change the minds of warmist politicians, who are either fully committed to the frauds or corrupted by bribes, or both.

My letters have alerted some of the media, who are finally finding their voices and objecting to the twin frauds of global warming and the Covid-19 full-Gulag lockdown, the baseless linking of these two scams (“to solve one we have to solve the other” – nonsense!), and the Marxists’ final solution – the Great Reset.

The letters serve another purpose – to document what is known now, and to do so for a future time when these twin frauds are investigated, possibly in Nuremberg-style trials for these fraudsters and criminals.

Best personal regards, Allan

February 23, 2021 9:31 am


Good point.

if these insane ‘vaccinations’ (otherwise known as genetic experiments) go wrong, there will surely be heads rolling.

Any government stupid enough (all of them) to absolve the pharmaceutical companies of all responsibility for future harm should be subject to Nuremberg-style trials, which might then precipitate similar for the climate scam.

The pharma’s may not be too far away, a couple of years for any effects to kick in, but I suspect you and I will be pushing up daisy’s before the climate fraudsters are ever called to book for their deception.

All the best,


Reply to  Hotscot
February 23, 2021 12:06 pm

If we are correct about imminent global cooling, the climate fraud may explode within a few years.

“Getting old and hate the cold.

February 23, 2021 12:49 pm


Isn’t it so terribly sad that we must almost wish for deadly cold to engulf the planet before our point is proven.

How much more could humanity have achieved without wasting trillions on the fantasy, climate change.

Tragically, even if the world went into a deep freeze tomorrow, the idiots would still be claiming it must last for 30 years to be considered climate change.

How many more millions must die before man on the street recognises they are being taken for a ride.

I don’t know if you saw Professor Michael Kelly’s report for the GWPF reporting it will cost every UK household ~£100,000 to modify their homes in order that the country can achieve the mythical Net Zero.

I did an exercise a couple of years before he published it and costed up modifying my own house. Sure enough ~£100,000. The letter I wrote to my MP, which he passed onto Whitehall laid the whole thing out in detail. Which is why my MP refused to reply directly, I’m sure. The numbers were irrefutable.

Whitehall sent me a pro forma letter saying increasing demand for Heat Pumps and insulation etc would see prices fall.

Bollox! The recession we’re all about to suffer will see prices likely rise relative to incomes over the next ten years or more.

And the beneficiaries of all these loans householder will be forced to take out to upgrade their houses?

Yep, the Banks………



Reply to  Hotscot
February 23, 2021 2:18 pm

Hi David my friend,

I’ve always said I’d rather be wrong about Prediction 3 – imminent global cooling. Humanity and the environment suffer during cold periods. This post is from 2012.
Best, Allan

johnpetroff says: September 16, 2012 at 9:37 pm
“There will be no “next glaciation” as long as modern man dominates the Earth. While we can debate the onset of the next cooling cycle, the planet is current warming and warming rapidly.”

I disagree John. The satellite record, which is the only reliable scientific record of current global temperature, shows no net warming for 10-15 years.

To be clear, I think Earth is at the end of a natural cyclical warming period and is about to enter a cooling period, which could be moderate or severe. This cooling will be apparent by 2020-2030 (or sooner) and could be as severe as the Dalton Minimum circa 1800 or the Maunder Minimum circa 1700. I’D RATHER BE WRONG ABOUT THIS PREDICTION.

Since there is no evidence that atmospheric CO2 has any significant impact on global warming, I do not see that mankind’s current fossil fuel burning activities have any significant impact on climate, either for better or worse. The only apparent impact of increasing atmospheric CO2 is to make little flowers happy.

I’m not convinced that whatever we do regarding methane will make any difference either. If running around shoving corks up the backsides of bovines is someone’s cup of tea, then let them proceed, but at their sole risk. Just do not expect it to have any impact on climate, and don’t send me the bill.  😐

February 23, 2021 3:10 pm

🙂 🙂 🙂

Don’t send me the bill…..LOL.

Reply to  Hotscot
February 23, 2021 8:50 am


Reply to  Hotscot
February 23, 2021 3:17 pm

Good advice, David.

Good suggestions should be framed as “These actions will make you look like a hero to the country”, “Everything a political leader could want, savings, efficiency, lower costs, reliability, foundations for future development…”.
That is, frame the skeptic positions accurately for what they will do for making the politicos look good.

Reply to  ATheoK
February 23, 2021 5:53 pm


The question should always be asked, how can I demonstrate what’s in it for him?

But I do take Allan’s point that his letter is for the record only.

March 3, 2021 6:55 am

think you might have better results arguing against the validity of cagw if you separate those arguments from your extreme right wing , conspiracy minded political views . maybe not here unfortunately but with a wider public audience

Reply to  Dennis
February 24, 2021 10:13 am

The late Rush Limbaugh first noticed this, five or six years ago, and then Shawn Hannity quoted Rush on this once or twice. “Truth” is what movers and shakers of the Left speak, by definition. Anything that is not so spoken, including measurements and evidence, is by correlation, “Untruth”. Further, if poked about this, these people reveal a deep and honest belief that they are actually god. They point to the first part of Genesis, believing that likewise, if one of them speak it, it becomes so and actually is so. They cannot lie!

I am not a psychiatrist, so I have no idea what label to apply to such a thinking pattern.

Reply to  Dennis
February 24, 2021 3:07 pm

Too bad about the opera house prediction fail.

Peter W
February 22, 2021 6:19 pm

Al Gore predicted in his movie that soon sea level rise would flood a good portion of Florida. We moved there anyway, although to the middle of the state – but that was strictly to avoid the worst effects of the hurricanes which, in spite of predictions to the contrary, have only been hitting the panhandle for the last couple of years.

Reply to  Peter W
February 22, 2021 6:34 pm

If banks stop lending money on hotels and houses on the beach, then you can start worrying.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Nikki
February 22, 2021 6:41 pm

The vast reinsurance companies are making a killing on premiums based on these fraudulent predictions of flooding. They’re funding this “science” to make fortunes.

Reply to  Peter W
February 22, 2021 8:09 pm

You should listen to Gore. If anyone knows about losing Florida it’s him

Clay Sanborn
Reply to  Mickey
February 22, 2021 9:50 pm

Oh, that’s a good one!

Chuck no longer in Houston
Reply to  Mickey
February 24, 2021 3:04 pm

Double Plus Good!

Reply to  Peter W
February 23, 2021 1:07 am

Al Gore is a good example of using an existing narrative in making money. He’ll be proven wrong on so much, but nobody will care, the narrative never cares. Narrative people will not look at the history. They are interested in trends. Boiling seas, last snow, failing crops, these are the narrative that sells a lot in this time.

John F Hultquist
February 22, 2021 6:24 pm

I figure I have about 10 years left, so won’t be able to check on this forecast.
The probability of this no-snow bunkum may not be zero, but is very close.
A large asteroid landing in the Irish Sea will help, but there isn’t a good chance of that either.

Mumbles McGuirck
February 22, 2021 6:25 pm

In essence, they’re saying NOTHING can dissuade them from their position, even an extended period of falling temperatures. Must be nice to be fact-proof.

Reply to  Mumbles McGuirck
February 22, 2021 6:36 pm

Icicles hanging off their oh so professorial beards might help.

Reply to  Mumbles McGuirck
February 22, 2021 6:37 pm

The temps could fall for 30 years but the co2 effect would still be there. Prove me wrong!

Richard M
Reply to  Mike
February 22, 2021 6:48 pm

CO2 has almost no effect. It’s so weak it cannot penetrate the surface to raise the temperature. As a result all the energy it does have gets eliminated every night.

CO2 does provide energy within the atmosphere. More CO2 provides more life (photosynthesis) and some added energy that life requires to prosper. It’s provided new every day and has no long term warming capability.

Reply to  Richard M
February 22, 2021 8:49 pm

I was making the point that no matter what evidence of co2’s inability to do much, the reply above is what we will hear from the zombies. In other words the co2 hypothesis seems to be concreted in.

Richard M
Reply to  Mike
February 23, 2021 5:25 am

I get it. My point is that it may actually be possible to prove them wrong. I would think my statement is testable experimentally. Testing the absorption and reradiation of water and soil should be doable by a high technology university. Not that any would chance doing it.

Reply to  Richard M
February 23, 2021 10:54 am

Experimental testing isn’t proof. Where are the computer models?

patrick healy
Reply to  TonyG
February 23, 2021 12:46 pm

I know that was tongue in cheek – you cheeky Racal.
Go and have a look at Lockdown sceptics today and see Professor Ferguson show you how computer models really work with the Chinese Flu Plandemic. sarc!

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Mumbles McGuirck
February 22, 2021 6:44 pm

Their position is ideological and metaphysical, not scientific. They don’t require evidence to support that. The BBC decided years ago that, come what may, their intention was to defraud the public with this nonsense … for the cause! The cause is socialism, globalism or progressivism … take your pick.

Reply to  Rory Forbes
February 23, 2021 7:40 am

believing wholeheartedly that you’re saving the world is pretty intoxicating

Rory Forbes
Reply to  garboard
February 23, 2021 10:26 am

Truer words were never said … and that is IT, after all.

Reply to  Mumbles McGuirck
February 22, 2021 7:11 pm

Reminds me of “Politifact”. Fact-proof if you are a Democrat.

Tom Halla
February 22, 2021 6:29 pm

I live in Texas, and last week was the coldest it has been since 1909. Aside from the green prayer wheels not producing much power, this is the first time in my 14 years in Texas that snow stuck more than a few hours.
The real issue is that ERCOT, the utility regulator, made contingency plans based on global warming. Or claimed to, as it benefited the subsidy miners investing in wind.

Reply to  Tom Halla
February 22, 2021 6:37 pm

“green prayer wheels” like it. I think it is pretty obvious they drank the koolaid and thought that global warming would keep things toasty. Now they have winter kill. Children and elderly are the most vulnerable.

Tom Halla
Reply to  Nikki
February 22, 2021 6:46 pm

It’s not my creation, but appropriate.

Reply to  Tom Halla
February 22, 2021 7:11 pm

White prayer wheels, like these, are no longer acceptable.

Reply to  Tom Halla
February 22, 2021 6:39 pm

Your observations apparently aren’t useful, so say the modelers.

Robert of Texas
Reply to  Tom Halla
February 22, 2021 7:06 pm

I started warning my children, friends, and their children that Texas is walking into blackouts by building too much intermittent capacity. They kind of acknowledged it “yeah, yeah…” but now they get it. Luckily, I had prepared and guess whose house people congregated?

Reply to  Robert of Texas
February 22, 2021 8:51 pm

Very wise. Not only that but Texas relied on wind and solar for its ‘reserve backup capacity’, I suppose because they bid the cheapest price

Reply to  Tom Halla
February 22, 2021 8:09 pm

Perhaps it is time to start suing the incompetents that run these companies. they can then join in their defence the climate scientists. But the companies have an obligation to provide power because that is the contract they have with the general public in exchange for the fees they charge for that power. Whenever they cannot do that they are n breach of that contract. Go after the companies and their directors and their scientific advisers for damages.

Reply to  Quilter52
February 22, 2021 8:56 pm

I think you will find they dont have ‘uninterrupted supply’ in the contract at all. It will be the reverse, supply is subject to the companies operational needs. Where I live supermarkets have their own back generators as even 5 min off causes too much disruption. The US stationary generator market are going to have some boom years because of what happened in Texas.

Reply to  Duker
February 23, 2021 4:45 am

Good luck on finding fuel to run intermittent generators. About the best you can do is bury a huge propane tank in the backyard because you really can’t depend on NG being supplied as demonstrated in Texas (which has more NG than it needs if only they can get it out of the ground).

Tom Halla
Reply to  Quilter52
February 23, 2021 4:36 am

The issue is that in Texas, there is no contract to sell fixed amounts of power, so if the wind turbines go down, the only loss to the investors is the lost sales. As the subsidized wind turbines have driven other suppliers out of the market, as they have preference, the subsidies are the problem.

Chuck no longer in Houston
Reply to  Tom Halla
February 24, 2021 3:12 pm

And much of this is through State and Federal legislation. The requirement that all windmill-produced energy gets 1st dibs on the grid is what has lead (led?) to this disaster.

February 22, 2021 6:29 pm

“People underestimate the power of models. Observational evidence is not very useful.” 

Continually Regurgitating Another Prevarication.

February 22, 2021 6:34 pm

Science advances one funeral at a time…..of the scientists.

February 22, 2021 6:35 pm

“People underestimate the power of models. Observational evidence is not very useful.””

Yes whenever I want to see if it’s raining outside today, I look at last week’s news which I record for just such an occasion..

Ben Vorlich
Reply to  Mike
February 23, 2021 3:30 am

I usw the weather App on my phone!! It isn’t much better than last week’s paper it has to be said.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Ben Vorlich
February 23, 2021 10:16 am

Weather apps, riiight.

Rory Forbes
February 22, 2021 6:35 pm

Yes, it is all very amusing, when you actually think about it, but very few people do that. Listening to the average person commenting on all these dire predictions they rarely blink … just repeat the nonsense ad nauseam and believe it. Looking at all these failed predictions since roughly 1990 (longer if you choose to remember the predictions of global cooling), they are ALL founded on failed science. They arise from conjecture (GHE) with no evidence at all and so many flaws it’s difficult to call it science at all.

Even on this site, with possibly the largest concentration of evidence showing scientific overreach and fraud in human history, there are still lukewarmers who equivocate the validity of CO2 magic science. The only empirical evidence we have indicates that not only have the planet’s many climates NOT changed much (if any) those changes have been beneficial, as has the increase in CO2.

There is simply no basis for ANY aspect of climate panic. Hell, by definition this whole planet cannot HAVE a single climate, so the entire goat rodeo is founded on a faulty premise. Climates are local (or at most regional), not global. CO2 is having NO negative effect. It’s time to stop giving credence to nonsense and Cargo Cult Science.

Reply to  Rory Forbes
February 22, 2021 6:43 pm

”Climates are local (or at most regional), not global.”

The climate change thingy is also local. A little change here, a little change there….
Except where I live.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Mike
February 22, 2021 6:52 pm

“Climate change” is a term chosen for its lack of clarity. It’s pure equivocation … an appeal to ambiguity. Of course climate changes, it’s the default condition. However that doesn’t mean we are able to experience it taking place; because the changes are often not within our sensory range over the time periods involved.

Reply to  Rory Forbes
February 22, 2021 9:01 pm

As far as I’m concerned, anything which does not involve Earth’s orbital variation or Sol’s fluctuations is weather regardless of how long it lasts.
Eg does the AMO change the climate? I think not.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Mike
February 22, 2021 9:35 pm

Frankly, I’m inclined to that way of thinking myself. On another thread, yesterday, there was an interesting debate on the finer points of how weather and climate differ. In the end … the conclusion was: it’s all just weather and we’re bit players. And it’s all immensely complex, involving vast forces and, being a coupled, nonlinear chaotic system is always dynamic. So, in the words of Forest, Forest Gump; “It happens”.

Cheers …

Michael in Dublin
Reply to  Rory Forbes
February 23, 2021 2:29 am


You are spot on with this comment.
I have not seen a single climate alarmist address the various climates or how a particular change in one area – hotter/colder, wetter/drier and the likes – impacts on the neighboring areas.
The Köppen climate classification, with five main zones and various sub divisions in each, while an oversimplification illustrates the complexity that is ignored by the alarmists.
Engineering climate in each of these is a fool’s errand. Climate is certainly not homogeneous. What is the ideal temperature – not just annual average – but for each season and for day and night in each of these? What is the ideal rainfall in each? There is layer upon layer upon layer of complexity.

Attempts to engineer climate will end in a spectacular and costly failure. Sensible steps to adapt will cost a tiny fraction of current and projected climate spending and reap a rich reward. Human ingenuity, since the beginning of recorded history, shows how we can make deserts bloom with irrigation and produce adequate food even in areas with long and cold winters.

Climate change is not the big threat we face but rather greed and corruption. Some will enormously enrich themselves through the climate scare at the expense of many who cannot afford to waste their meagre resources. We often realize too late that a fool and his money are soon parted.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Michael in Dublin
February 23, 2021 10:24 am

Well said. We’ve been told that our dependence on fossil fuels has jeopardized our planet’s “health” and ability to sustain life. I see nothing of the sort. Even if humans have made some small contribution to the general warming, it has netted nothing but good. If we have increased CO2, good for us. That has offset Earth’s propensity to sequester it and limit plant growth. We should be rejoicing at our good fortune.

Tim Gorman
Reply to  Michael in Dublin
February 23, 2021 3:13 pm

As nearly as I can tell the growing-season map for the US has not changed one iota for decades. That means that the Democrats fear of “climate refugees” is probably just plain idiocy. It definitely means that the climate across the US is not changing sufficiently to cause alarm. If birds are moving habitat its problem for reasons other than climate change – climate change is just an easy scapegoat.We have more local geese during the winter but its not because of warmer temps, it’s because of more people feeding them around the parks and lakes! We used to grow mainly soybeans and milo around here. Now its a little soybean and a lot of corn. Of course corn leaves more in the field after harvest than milo ever did so the geese stick around to eat it and then go back to the frozen lakes to roost.

I don’t have growing-season maps for Europe and South America. It would be interesting to see how they have changed over the past decades.

Chuck no longer in Houston
Reply to  Tim Gorman
February 24, 2021 3:18 pm

Bingo – nailed it. Where people actually live, no one is seeing any changes. And weather just is.

Richard M
February 22, 2021 6:43 pm

It appears they may be right. The Arctic sea ice is falling fast.

Or maybe is could be an error.

Reply to  Richard M
February 22, 2021 7:35 pm

The Arctic sea ice is falling fast, or they could be using a model…

Reply to  RelPerm
February 23, 2021 4:48 am

Due to cloud cover over the Arctic they actually have to use a model to fill in the gaps (although they are pretty good at getting a good estimate).

Rod Evans
Reply to  Richard M
February 22, 2021 11:20 pm

Not so much falling as sinking if that graph was anywhere near correct. Now that would be a whole new Climate Change fear generating system to play with, “Sinking ice”! The climate is changing so fast the ice is sinking to the bottom!! 🙂

Chuck no longer in Houston
Reply to  Rod Evans
February 24, 2021 3:20 pm

I noticed this week that the NSIDC graph had failed to update for several days. It seems to be up-to-date now:

Reply to  Richard M
February 23, 2021 3:07 am

Certainely an error, as the last update was for Jan 19th

2 missing days ’til now.

Reply to  Richard M
February 23, 2021 3:16 am

Just found that:

Missing product Sea Ice Emissivity OSI-404-aSubmitted by osisaf-hldmi-prod on Tue, 23/02/2021 – 00:05
sea ice
Dear OSI SAF Sea Ice Emissivity User,
Due to (an anomaly in the processing chain / missing input data SSMIS), we have not been able to generate the product with timestamp “202102221200”.
We apologize for any inconvenience.


Ben Vorlich
Reply to  Richard M
February 23, 2021 3:37 am

I noticed this earlier this morning. In the past I’ve contacted the The DMI about things like this. Normally they reply with an explanation, I think a lot of their web stuff is done automatically and they don’t always notice problems straight away

Rich T.
February 22, 2021 7:05 pm Maybe this should be required reading for the Met Office. But when did reality actually have anything to do with weather prediction with this bunch of CC loons. Since we have had 30+ years of False predictions to scare us to believe them.

February 22, 2021 7:18 pm

“People underestimate the power of models. Observational evidence is not very useful.”

Let’s do that with cancer, other diseases, gravity, thermodynamics, basic math (racist or not), etc, etc,

Reply to  Pauleta
February 23, 2021 11:01 am

We seem to be heading that way with math

February 22, 2021 7:22 pm

Didn’t the managers of Heathrow and Gatwick in London scale down snow clearing plant and operations capacity based on medium term no-snow predictions from the Met a few years back?

And then of course, it snowed like buggery, and airport traffic was disrupted for a week or so while the managers scrambled to get some snow-clearing resources in place.

Reply to  Mr.
February 22, 2021 8:13 pm

Heathrow should sue the Met Office and HADCRUT for deceptive and misleading conduct.

Rich T.
February 22, 2021 7:23 pm

As for the Artic ice extant. Does happen during these conditions. Warmer Artic when the wavy jet streams start. And the rest ou go cold.

February 22, 2021 7:30 pm

The saddest part is that those producing the temperature record have a process of adjustment that supports the world view of CO2 warming. They would redefine the temperature scale if they could to ensure the values keep going up.

They already have the world fixated on anomalies rather than measured temperature. Ask 10 climate modellers what the global surface temperature actually is and they will give you a range over 10 degrees. Ask them what the anomaly will be in 2100 and they will give you a range within 5 degrees; there is greater certainty about how much it will increase than what it actually is right now. How confused is that. The could not give a toss if it 8 or 18 today but another 1.5 is going to create hell on Earth.

It is pointless to argue with Climate zealots. Their minds have departed from reality.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  RickWill
February 22, 2021 8:37 pm

When you’re a truly abysmal “scientist”, like Phil Jones, Mikey Mann, Gavin Schmidt, James Hansen or Kevin Trenberth, to name only a few of the Hockey Team, the real magic in climate modeling, rather than actual science, is rarely having to confront your failures. Modeled output is any range you want to make it, so you can never be wrong.

Reply to  Rory Forbes
February 23, 2021 1:40 am

But according to Stokes they do good maths 😉

Wim Röst
February 22, 2021 7:31 pm

Good article. Who can be held responsible for the failure of predictions?

David Stone CEng
Reply to  Wim Röst
February 23, 2021 1:12 pm

If one predicts but is shown by events to be wrong, most will suffer. These people just lie and say they predicted something which did happen. This is called FRAUD of the worst kind, and they should suffer the ultimate penalty. Strangely they don’t, but if I do something wrong and a few people are killed, I go to prison. This is the newspeak philosophy. Many of them get paid more than me from the public purse. Would you prefer them or your bridge to stay up? I can only presume the former.

Chris Hanley
February 22, 2021 7:33 pm

The “fortress mindset” is partly due to the teleological belief that human influence on the climate must be harmful per se.

Pat from Kerbob
Reply to  Chris Hanley
February 23, 2021 1:05 pm

Yes, that is what i see. People comment to me that the amount of CO2 we produce MUST be bad, sine humans are doing it.
I point out that the only thing we know for sure to date is a greener planet and less famine, all unalloyed goods.

Bob in Castlemaine
February 22, 2021 7:57 pm

So how many of these establishment alarmists really believe the junk-science they endorse?
I suspect a substantial percentage know it’s BS but are too invested in the great scam career wise to dare admit they have been in error.
A sad situation because with the West so obsessed with the CAGW religion it seems unlikely that any return to objective science is likely before western civilization destroys itself.

Rod Evans
Reply to  Eric Worrall
February 22, 2021 11:36 pm

Eric, I don’t believe it is group think so much as group objective. The adherents to the new socialist religion take the view, even if the facts they present are wrong, the objective is right. Destroying capitalism and hence consumerism is being progressed which is their only common desire. The truth is secondary to the prime objective.
The need to simplify and end constant growth is what it is all about.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Bob in Castlemaine
February 22, 2021 8:45 pm

Those are my observations as well. Most of the inner circle in the UN and the IPCC have known for years how flawed the science is, but they justify the deceit as all ideological mystics do … “it’s for the greater good”. The Public either can’t handle or don’t need to know the truth. The “scientists” just don’t want to get in the way of the gravy train. Many aren’t of the most scrupulous ethics, either.

Socialism will continue to die hard, because those least affected by its failures are the ones doing the promoting. The true believers are simply useful idiots.

Reply to  Rory Forbes
February 23, 2021 1:42 am

“ Socialism will continue to die hard, because those least affected by its failures are the ones doing the promoting.”

All I see is socialism growing 🙁

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Derg
February 23, 2021 10:04 am

The expression, “to die hard” means that something refuses to die, like a persistent infection. Just when you think you’ve got it licked, you find it has got into another corner. That’s why many are called “die hard” socialists, like Bernie Sanders. The idiots keep believing there is some as yet untried method to implement it that will work, but hasn’t been properly tried.

Reply to  Rory Forbes
February 23, 2021 9:57 am

Socialist to kid at orange juice stand on street corner..”You should give your orange juice away so that more people can afford to drink it”…..Capitalist to same kid “ Take your sales profits a go buy more oranges”. Now which philosophy is going to result in more people having orange juice to drink?

Rory Forbes
Reply to  DMacKenzie
February 23, 2021 10:11 am

Now which philosophy is going to result in more people having orange juice to drink?

We know the answer to that, don’t we. One needs but to study the sorry life of Marx himself to understand the sort of people who push socialism. He was a disgusting parasite who had no idea of the meaning of work.

Chuck no longer in Houston
Reply to  Rory Forbes
February 24, 2021 3:30 pm

Sounds a lot like Bernie. Went from a failed handyman/contractor business (never really worked out), was always behind in rent/bills and went on to become the mayor or councilman in some small Vermont town. Knows nothing about real-world economics and believes that the world owes us a living.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Chuck no longer in Houston
February 24, 2021 4:27 pm

You got it in one. It’s not really very surprising why Marxism (or what they tell themselves it is) appeals to these people, is it?

February 22, 2021 9:03 pm

The Royal Society is a political organisation. It has nothing to do with science. It has been like this for the past 30 years.

Peta of Newark
February 22, 2021 9:21 pm

Its all here in the story itself and especially the comments (so far)

Perfectly nailed it here:
“”This is a group of people who openly admit they are unmoved by observational evidence which contradicts their worldview.
How do you change the minds of people whose view of climate science appears to be based on blind faith in computer models, rather than observations?””

Go look for and spend an hour or two finding out about Magical Thinking
Put this into your search engine, Google will do:

magical thinking psychology

Just on the page that opens in my UK Firefox I get:
“”Magical thinking, or superstitious thinking, is the belief that unrelated events are causally connected despite the absence of any plausible causal link between them, particularly as a result of supernatural effects””

Says it all.

Scratch around a bit more, notice how “Post hoc ergo propter hoc” (the Cause and Effect Error) crops up.

You will see mention of the use of of the oft repeated Mystical Phrases, especially the ones where all the initial letters are the same
e.g. Climate Change, Weird Weather
along with all the other magic phrases
Trapped Heat
Green House Gases
etc etc

Phrases that mean everything to the Magical Thinker but are garbage otherwise.

From the Wiki:
“”Bronisław Malinowski’s Magic, Science and Religion (1954) discusses another type of magical thinking, in which words and sounds are thought to have the ability to directly affect the world. This type of wish fulfilment thinking can result in the avoidance of talking about certain subjects (“speak of the devil and he’ll appear”), the use of euphemisms instead of certain words, or the belief that to know the “true name” of something gives one power over it, or that certain chants, prayers, or mystical phrases will bring about physical changes in the world

Says it all don’t it.
Wish Fulfilment.
Speak His Name (the naming of storms????)

From a doctor’s blog, here
“”Beware the tendency to let others think for you. This is as insidious as it is widespread. A journalist presents a position about a topic of the day and has his or her opinion accepted as fact. One friend makes a statement about another and everyone accepts it as true without bothering to investigate themselves. Though I don’t agree with many of the principles espoused by Ayn Rand in her book, The Fountainhead, the point she makes about how so many of us subjugate our judgment to others is worth taking to heart””

Along the way, see references to what causes it – the most common, cause not cause, is that Magical Thinking is an integral part of childhood

Leaves one wondering if ‘adult’ magical thinkers either never grew up or have reverted to childhood.
Pretty well defines Socialism doncha think?
= the desire for everyone else to Do All The Work, a desire to Return To The Womb

Watch for references as to what causes it, you will be venturing in Schizophrenia Land.Don’t worry, you’re not Schizophrenic, OR, does your own Magical Thinking tell you you might be and you don’t wanna find out……
Scary innit, what is real and what is not?

Main cause is put down to Genetics.
Isn’t that just Fan. Tas. Tic.
Even the ‘learned’ folks writing about it Pass The Buck, to their very own parents.
Boy oh boy, is this a train wreck and a half?

To my mind they are confusing Nature with Nurture.

No special matter, it all boils down to neurotransmitters and stress
Esp brain development in the 1st trimester but must also include the 30 months post-partum
And those transmitters have everything to do with Food and Nutrition.
I’ve raved often enough, Magnesium, Potassium, Sodium, Lithium, all the B Vitamins, Vitamin D etc etc
While the most important antidote, Saturated Fat, is utterly, relentlessly and completely demonised.
Saturated Fat is The Most Important Thing for building brains inside the first 30 months of life.

Yet only 35% of UK babies are breastfed, the rest get Fake Milk containing Fake (vegetable) Fat
They then go on to diet high in sugar ## while deficient in (esp for mental development) Iron and Vitamin B
If that don’t go a long way to explaining Magically Thought out & Childish politics, science and Media, what does?

## The sugar being used to persuade them to eat vegetables. Things riddled with alien protein put into the veggies specifically to try stop themselves from being eaten. those proteins then go on to trash and drive our Immune Systems totally crazy, as we see.

Then we get to stress. Coming from the absolute need for constantly bankrupt Western Governments to have something called ‘Inflation’ That they can borrow money from children and only pay back a fraction when those kids are grown and want their money back.

That everyone’s money is constantly devalued and that they have to work and work and work ever harder, just to stand still.
Stress all the way down the line.

So, The People use, under Government Guidance:
Comfort Food (Cooked starch = sugar)

And if they don’t trash your neurotransmitters, you go and demand your money back because THAT is exactly what they are designed to do and why you consume them

See The Problem now….

February 22, 2021 10:45 pm

The Cold Wave is still alive and well in Russia. It threatens to continue to move to the west and into Europe, which it has been slowly doing over recent weeks.

2 22 21.png
Reply to  goldminor
February 23, 2021 8:16 am

Starting this weekend, a cold front will start to change the temperatures in Europe.
For the moment, they are blaring the increase of the temperatures from around -20°C to +20°C, that’s about 40K difference within a few day and declared as a record increase never seen during the last decades…..
But what do they believe air comming directly from the Sahara will do ?
It’s CC, what else, acting the fool 😀

February 22, 2021 11:33 pm

I might be dreaming but imagine Britain becoming a tropical paradise. What can be bad about that?

Rod Evans
Reply to  Lrp
February 22, 2021 11:57 pm

Well Lrp, there would also be poisonous snakes biting bugs Nile fever, Malaria, Yellow fever and other bug carried infections. Zika and Ebola aren’t so good either.

Reply to  Rod Evans
February 23, 2021 1:49 am

No no, think more of Barbados or Grand Cayman

Reply to  Lrp
February 23, 2021 6:01 am

No one has yet explained to me the benefit of frozen poles, other than for a lump of ice in a G&T.

They bang on about albedo, but the reason the poles are frozen is because the Sun’s effect on them is so weak, ricocheting off at an obtuse angle.

Reply to  Eric Worrall
February 23, 2021 4:29 am

Malaria was usual in Russia in earlier times too.

Pat from Kerbob
Reply to  Krishna Gans
February 23, 2021 1:02 pm

In Leningrad
Absolutely tropical.

Reply to  Eric Worrall
February 23, 2021 9:10 am

Only because when they wrote about malaria, they went –
maro . . marl . . malolie . .


Ague. Let’s just call it Ague.

Rhys Jaggar
February 22, 2021 11:49 pm

The problem is not the scientists holding incorrect views, it is whosoever continues funding them to hold them.

In efficient markets, those with useless products disappear in the main.

It is only in rigged ones that survival is based on grift and sycophancy not product quality at a particular price-point.

Now if the UK Government made it clear that it would be cutting funding for modelling by 75%, things might change.

Matthew Sykes
February 23, 2021 12:31 am

Haha, the Met Office, what utter clowns.

February 23, 2021 12:44 am

“People underestimate the power of models. Observational evidence is not very useful.”

Jo Bastardi thinks the opposite.

Reply to  mwhite
February 23, 2021 1:08 am

Joe Bastardi is a real meteorologist. The others are merely careerist poltroons.

Chuck no longer in Houston
Reply to  mwhite
February 24, 2021 3:37 pm

This is absolutely infuriating. When my left leaning friends bring up the subject, my reply is simply “go outside, what’s different?” I’ve given up on trying to explain the technical side of things. And I do have left-leaning friends, a lot of them. As sort of a hobby I’m the music director for the band in church. Say what you will, I’m a garage rock guy from the 70s but I love playing all types of music.

February 23, 2021 12:44 am

Please, the organisation referred to is the UK Meteorological Office, normally known as the Met Office (check out their website). Not the MET Office, and not ‘the MET’.
The latter usually refers to the Metropolitan (i.e. London) Police.
The Met Office still does good work on short-range weather forecasting, the website forecasts are usually spot on and get the arrival of changes of weather right to within the hour.
The ‘climate’ stuff, well that’s politics, so of nil value.
My late father worked as a forecaster for the Met Office for his entire career, so I know they do good work.
By all means slag them off for their ‘climate’ garbage, but at least get the name correct.
If you seem not be able to get that right, it just discredits otherwise sound arguments.

Reply to  sonofametman
February 23, 2021 6:08 am


David Stone CEng
Reply to  sonofametman
February 23, 2021 1:03 pm

Nonsense, see newer posts. They are now a private company, they are not a proper Government organ at all, and why “office”, that was Civil Service speak many years ago when they used paper and pencils.

February 23, 2021 3:19 am

Politicians in all parties in the UK face organised campaigns by climate extremist groups to embrace the greenest agendas possible. I have no one I can vote for who might even want to think about challenging these idiots, as it would damage their electoral prospects. The BBC happily advances the green cause at every opportunity, thus exacerbating the process.

Phil Rae
Reply to  David
February 23, 2021 4:07 am

The real problem, David, is that the politicians themselves have become “climate change” activists. Witness Boris’ (the Prime Minister) ridiculous comments in the newspapers today about the threats from the impending, and totally fictitious, “climate emergency”. We are dealing with propaganda, pure & simple, and it pervades everything these days.

Richard Page
Reply to  David
February 23, 2021 6:49 am

All of the Green lobby groups lobby using their maximum allowance (limited by statute) but, in addition to that, they provide ‘voluntary’ workers in many of the MP’s offices. These workers are paid salaries by the lobby groups which are then exceeding their limits on lobbying when the money for their lobbying and ‘voluntary worker’ wages is added together. If you want to stop some of these Green groups then that might be the way to do it – fine them for every year (backdated) that they have exceeded their lobbying limits.

I think the same thing happens in the USA so it could work there with a good government.

Reply to  David
February 23, 2021 10:23 am

It’s the same in Australia and all over the developed world. These days everybody is actively green, pastoralists, grain growers, mining companies, banks, local councils, shops, public service, transport companies, everybody.

February 23, 2021 3:58 am

The problem is that the OP continues to call the Climate Priesthood scientists, when they are clearly not. Quit giving anyone cover who continues to behave as an acolyte, rather than a real member of the scientific community. Someone who understands that without measurements to check theories, those claiming knowledge are just poking once again in chicken entrails to predict the future. Over millennia that hasn’t had a good record.

February 23, 2021 6:36 am

The major reasons the hiatus was interrupted in 2015 was because of: the 2015~16 Super El Niño event (which still hasn’t been followed by strong La Niña event to offset it), the PDO cool cycle is overdue, and the AMO is still in the tail end of its warm cycle (but should soon reenter its cool cycle).

Once we finally get: a Strong La Niña event, the PDO and AMO cycles enter their respective 30-year cool cycles, and we get a VEI 5+ volcanic event, global temps will start falling again for at least 30 years.

Leftists will then have a very hard time convincing people the global cooling, growing Arctic sea ice extents, growing Antarctic and Greenland Land Ice, and falling/flattening sea levels are being caused by CO2 warming…

I’ve greatly enjoyed the beneficial warming we’ve had the good fortune of experiencing since the end of the Little Ice Age and dread the coming cold.

Remember, during the last PDO cool cycle (1945~1977) scientists predicted man-made global cooling would usher in a new Ice Age….

George Daddis
Reply to  SAMURAI
February 23, 2021 6:58 am

I believe the “Narrative” has met that challenge and moved on.
Most people, especially young ‘uns, now think in terms of “Climate Change” and “Extreme Weather” and any occurrence of either are their “observational proof”.

If you do mention “Global Warming” they will point to one record “hundred year high” that occurred somewhere on the planet last summer.

Reply to  George Daddis
February 23, 2021 7:11 pm


Yes, unfortunately, most of our young people have been completely brainwashed by their public schools, MSM, Internet, Leftist political hacks, and Hollywood to believe the CAGW Hoax is an “existential” threat to all life on earth..

Leftists who rank years without trend data are childish, dishonest, and unscientific… The beneficial global warming trend since the end of the Little Ice Age in 1850 is just 0.05C/decade which is of no concern.

The primary reason why the warming trend since 1980 is higher than the 170-year average is because the PDO and AMO are still in their 30-year warm cycles, and it’s interesting to note it’s about the same as the last PDO warm cycle (1912~1945) when CO2 forcing could not have been a factor,


February 23, 2021 9:45 am

“Our great computers fill our hallowed halls”

February 23, 2021 10:39 am

Every time it rains it rains….newspeak from somewhere.

David Stone CEng
February 23, 2021 12:58 pm

GIGO. Climate models are open-ended unverified nonsense. The MET added “climate change” to the weather models, now the forecasts are nearly always significantly wrong in the UK! A few years back they were very good. Why, ah, I know “climate change”, both the reasons and the result!

james Fosser
February 23, 2021 1:53 pm

A Planck once said “Science progresses one funeral at a time”.

Komerade Cube
February 23, 2021 5:43 pm

“Thankfully politicians in advanced societies face a regular reality check, on a much shorter timescale than the 50 years proposed by The Royal Society.”

yeah, not so much anynmore.

February 24, 2021 2:57 am

Off topic, a very strong quake (5.6) just struck in Iceland. There was one foreshock then the 5.6 and 2 strong aftershock ( 4.6 and 4.8), all in the last 23 minutes. Maybe a volcano will go active.

February 25, 2021 1:50 am

Has anyone else noticed that since Christmas, they’ve been reducing the amount of sunshine they show relative to the actual weather?

My guess is that it’s all part of the delusional brainwashing over covid – got to keep the unwashed masses from planning to go out and get their vitamin – because if they get immune from simply having sunshine – why would they take a genetically alternating therapy (not a vaccine)

Robert of Ottawa
February 25, 2021 3:49 am

It’s time that anyone using a model to justify something should be thrown out of windows.

Reply to  Robert of Ottawa
February 25, 2021 7:49 am

We could construct a model to show what happens to something thrown out a window if gravity is reversed…

Verified by MonsterInsights