Climate scientists officially declare ‘climate emergency’ at an end

Press release by the Climate Intelligence Group (CLINTEL)

The Chamber of Deputies in session

Climate scientists have issued a shock declaration that the “climate emergency” is over.

A two-day climate conference in Prague, organised by the Czech division of the international Climate Intelligence Group (Clintel), which took place on November 12-13 in the Chamber of Deputies of the Czech Republic in Prague, “declares and affirms that the imagined and imaginary ‘climate emergency’ is at an end”.

The communiqué, drafted by the eminent scientists and researchers who spoke at the conference, makes clear that for several decades climate scientists have  systematically exaggerated the influence of CO2 on global temperature.

The high-level scientific conference also declared:

“The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which excludes participants and published papers disagreeing with its narrative, fails to comply with its own error-reporting protocol and draws conclusions some of which are dishonest, should be forthwith dismantled.”

The declaration supports the conclusions of the major Clintel report The Frozen Climate Views of the IPCC [presented to the Conference by Marcel Crok, Clintel’s co-founder].

Moreover, the scientists at the conference declared that even if all nations moved straight to net zero emissions, by the 2050 target date the world would be only about 0.1 C cooler than with no emissions reduction.

So far, the attempts to mitigate climate change by international agreements such as the Paris Agreement have made no difference to our influence on climate, since nations such as Russia and China, India and Pakistan continue greatly to expand their combustion of coal, oil and gas.

The cost of achieving that 0.1 C reduction in global warming would be $2 quadrillion, equivalent to 20 years’ worldwide gross domestic product.

Finally, the conference “calls upon the entire scientific community to cease and desist from its persecution of scientists and researchers who disagree with the current official narrative on climate change and instead to encourage once again the long and noble tradition of free, open and uncensored scientific research, investigation, publication and discussion”.

The full text of the communiqué follows:

The International Scientific Conference of the Climate Intelligence Group (Clintel), in the Chamber of Deputies of the Czech Republic in Prague assembled on the Twelfth and Thirteenth Days of November 2024, has resolved and now declares as follows, that is to say –

  1. The modest increase in the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide that has taken place since the end of the Little Ice Age has been net-beneficial to humanity.
  2. Foreseeable future increases in greenhouse gases in the air will probably also prove net-beneficial.
  3. The rate and amplitude of global warming have been and will continue to be appreciably less than climate scientists have long predicted.
  4. The Sun, and not greenhouse gases, has contributed and will continue to contribute the overwhelming majority of global temperature.
  5. Geological evidence compellingly suggests that the rate and amplitude of global warming during the industrial era are neither unprecedented nor unusual.
  6. Climate models are inherently incapable of telling us anything about how much global warming there will be or about whether or to what extent the warming has a natural or anthropogenic cause.
  7. Global warming will likely continue to be slow, small, harmless and net-beneficial.
  8. There is broad agreement among the scientific community that extreme weather events have not increased in frequency, intensity or duration and are in future unlikely to do so.
  9. Though global population has increased fourfold over the past century, annually averaged deaths attributable to any climate-related or weather-related event have declined by 99%.
  10. Global climate-related financial losses, expressed as a percentage of global annual gross domestic product, have declined and continue to decline notwithstanding the increase in built infrastructure in harm’s way.
  11. Despite trillions of dollars spent chiefly in Western countries on emissions abatement, global temperature has continued to rise since 1990.
  12. Even if all nations, rather than chiefly western nations, were to move directly and together from the current trajectory to net zero emissions by the official target year of 2050, the global warming prevented by that year would be no more than 0.05 to 0.1 Celsius.
  13. If the Czech Republic, the host of this conference, were to move directly to net zero emissions by 2050, it would prevent only 1/4000 of a degree of warming by that target date.
  14. Based pro rata on the estimate by the UK national grid authority that preparing the grid for net zero would cost $3.8 trillion (the only such estimate that is properly-costed), and on the fact that the grid accounts for 25% of UK emissions, and that UK emissions account for 0.8% of global emissions, the global cost of attaining net zero would approach $2 quadrillion, equivalent to 20 years’ global annual GDP.
  15. On any grid where the installed nameplate capacity of wind and solar power exceeds the mean demand on that grid, adding any further wind or solar power will barely reduce grid CO2 emissions but will greatly increase the cost of electricity and yet will reduce the revenues earned by both new and existing wind and solar generators.
  16. The resources of techno-metals required to achieve global net zero emissions are entirely insufficient even for one 15-year generation of net zero infrastructure, so that net zero is in practice unattainable.
  17. Since wind and solar power are costly, intermittent and more environmentally destructive per TWh generated than any other energy source, governments should cease to subsidize or to prioritize them, and should instead expand coal, gas and, above, all nuclear generation.
  18. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which excludes participants and published papers disagreeing with its narrative, fails to comply with its own error-reporting protocol and draws conclusions some of which are dishonest, should be forthwith dismantled.

Therefore, this conference hereby declares and affirms that the imagined and imaginary “climate emergency” is at an end.

This conference calls upon the entire scientific community to cease and desist from its persecution of scientists and researchers who disagree with the current official narrative on climate change and instead to encourage once again the long and noble tradition of free, open and uncensored scientific research, investigation, publication and discussion.

Given under our signs manual this Thirteenth Day of November in the Year of our Lord Two Thousand and Twenty-Four.

Pavel Kalenda, Czech Republic [Conference Chairman]

Guus Berkhout, The Netherlands [Co-founder, Clintel]

Marcel Crok, The Netherlands [Co-founder, Clintel]

Lord Monckton, United Kingdom

Valentina Zharkova, United Kingdom

Milan Šálek, Czech Republic

Václav Procházka, Czech Republic

Gregory Wrightstone, United States

Jan Pokorný, Czech Republic

Szarka László, Hungary

James Croll, United Kingdom

Tomas Furst, Czech Republic

Gerald Ratzer, Canada

Douglas Pollock, Chile

Henri Masson, Belgium

Miroslav Žáček, Czech Republic

Jan-Erik Solheim, Norway

4.9 69 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

100 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Nick Stokes
November 19, 2024 10:11 pm

“shock declaration”

I’m stunned!

Mr.
Reply to  Nick Stokes
November 19, 2024 10:28 pm

#MeToo Nick.

I’m stunned that supposedly rational adults could ever buy into the whole climate crisis crank cult.

History deniers the lot of them.

Reply to  Mr.
November 19, 2024 10:31 pm

#MeTooNick

I’m stunned that climate scientists believe averaging reduces systematic error.

John XB
Reply to  walter.h893
November 20, 2024 8:08 am

But it does create decimal points where they don’t exist in the raw data, and numbers to tenths, hundredths – so it looks really impressive, accurate stuff – really sciency so must be true.

Reply to  Mr.
November 20, 2024 5:44 am

Shouldn’t the media headlines all read “Scientists Declare Climate Crisis Is Over“?

Someone
Reply to  Mark Whitney
November 20, 2024 6:35 am

 Scientists Declare the Climate Crisis That Never Was is Over.

Jimmie Dollard
Reply to  Mr.
November 20, 2024 9:01 pm

Nothing new here. Every point has been made here on WUWT many times by many papers. This declaration will have no more effect on the climate cult than prior papers.

observa
Reply to  Nick Stokes
November 20, 2024 1:08 am

So you should be Nick with Big Climate-
‘UN climate slush fund’: COP conferences all about money
unless you’re on the payroll too

Reply to  Nick Stokes
November 20, 2024 2:28 am

Yep Nick, we have noted from your comments that your mind is perpetually in a state similar to that of a stunned mullet !!

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  bnice2000
November 20, 2024 11:34 am

The haircut?

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  Nick Stokes
November 20, 2024 6:39 am

Of course. A person living in a fantasy world is always stunned when reality is forced upon him.

Ian_e
Reply to  Nick Stokes
November 20, 2024 7:52 am

Goodo.

November 19, 2024 10:29 pm

Global warming will likely continue to be slow, small, harmless and net-beneficial.

It may not even continue at all; the future can’t be predicted. Shouldn’t governments also prepare for the possibility of a colder planet in the long-term future?

Corrigenda
Reply to  walter.h893
November 20, 2024 3:30 am

Indeed and Pigs might fly in the future too.

bobpjones
Reply to  Corrigenda
November 20, 2024 4:24 am

Well they do, in a pub in Bowness https://www.theflyingpigbowness.co.uk/

Crispin in Val Quentin
Reply to  Corrigenda
November 21, 2024 4:46 pm

Correct. You will see them at COP30, grunting and snorting and rooting around for $$$.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Crispin in Val Quentin
November 22, 2024 2:30 pm

And hookers.

Richard M
Reply to  walter.h893
November 20, 2024 6:39 am

The warming effect of the Hunga-Tonga eruption is likely to fade away over the next couple of years. The last 3 AMO phases have averaged 31 years and we are currently at year 30 of the most recent warm phase. This also signals cooling in the not too distant future.

Someone
Reply to  walter.h893
November 20, 2024 6:51 am

It will certainly continue until the onset of the next glaciation. Preparing for long-term is unnecessary. Governments should not be overreacting, they should spend on current problems.

John XB
Reply to  walter.h893
November 20, 2024 8:11 am

No! We don’t want Governments preparing for anything – not declaring global crisis requiring global action – they do enough damage as it is.

No, no, no!

November 19, 2024 10:55 pm

Climate scientists officially declare ‘climate emergency’ at an end

How can something that never existed (except in the wet dreams of climate seancers and activists) be at an end?

Nick Stokes
Reply to  Redge
November 20, 2024 12:45 am

Indeed, the statement is contradictory:
““declares and affirms that the imagined and imaginary ‘climate emergency’ is at an end”.

Reply to  Nick Stokes
November 20, 2024 2:30 am

Nothing contradictory there….

There is, and never has been, an actual real “climate emergency”

The FAKE, imaginary one is coming to an end as well.

Only a bunch of ignorant, brain-washed fools exist to keep the fairy-tale alive.

Are you proud to be one of then, Nick ??

CampsieFellow
Reply to  bnice2000
November 21, 2024 3:02 am

I think you miss Nick’s point entirely. They are declaring something imaginary to be at an end. Nick’s perfectly valid point is that if it is imaginary it cannot ever have existed and if it never existed it cannot have had a beginning and if it never had a beginning it cannot have an end. If you actually examined Nick’s statement carefully instead of going into a tizzy just because it was made by Nick you might see his point. Even climate alarmists can sometimes be right. Just as climate realists can also sometimes be wrong. Once we all accept that, we might be getting somewhere. Incidentally Nick never gets in a tizzy but by gum he’s very good at stoking the fires of others. Some people seem to froth at the mouth at the mere mention of his name.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  CampsieFellow
November 21, 2024 8:48 am

Spot on.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  CampsieFellow
November 22, 2024 2:32 pm

 If you actually examined Nick’s statement carefully instead of going into a tizzy just because it was made by Nick you might see his point.”

Tizzies are what he/she/it does.

Reply to  Nick Stokes
November 20, 2024 2:56 am

Olympic league nit-picking, there, Nick! Congratulations!

Bryan A
Reply to  Zig Zag Wanderer
November 20, 2024 11:44 am

Ayup, he certainly does Nick-Pick fairly often

Reply to  Bryan A
November 20, 2024 11:46 am

FUD.

November 20, 2024 12:01 am

I agree with the sentiment, but this is just a pebble in the way of the climate-crisis steamroller. It’s not about science any more, it’s about Mickey Mouse scientists and politicians staking their reputations on AGW and not wanting to be made to look like the complete and utter fools they are. Once they have their get out of jail free cards, they might change course.

Hopefully Trump will be that card – if the USA cancels the Paris Accords permanently, meaning the 2 biggest economies in the world aren’t going to be shackling their emissions, then the rest of the world may tut-tut for a bit and then decide that there’s no point in self-sabotage when there’s no hope of moving the CO2 needle.

Bob B.
Reply to  PariahDog
November 20, 2024 3:49 am

Hopefully, Trump will also end grants for studies designed to return narrative supporting results.

Richard M
Reply to  Bob B.
November 20, 2024 6:43 am

Appointing climate realists to head government agencies would do a lot to end the hype. This applies especially to NASA, NOAA and NHC

Dave Fair
Reply to  Richard M
November 20, 2024 9:02 am

It is important to end NOAA’s billion dollar disaster reporting. They know damned well that it is a bogus metric designed solely to mislead people into thinking weather extremes are becoming more frequent. Liars, all of them.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  Dave Fair
November 21, 2024 8:50 am

Historically, that assessment is derived from the early days of calculating hurricane class based on damage assessments.

We now have different, and presumedly better/more accurate, means of classification. But the bureaucracy could not give up its budget allocation so they repurposed it.

Bryan A
Reply to  PariahDog
November 20, 2024 11:48 am

…there’s no point in self-sabotage when there’s no hope of moving the CO2 needle

Let me correct that just a little

there’s no point in self-sabotage when there’s no hope of moving the CO2 needle getting more research dollar$

AND…there won’t be any Free Money fed into the Climate Coffers from the Deepest Pockets on the Globe either

Jim Masterson
Reply to  PariahDog
November 20, 2024 12:43 pm

Are we sure this isn’t a Babylon Bee or The Onion article? It almost sounds too good to be true.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  PariahDog
November 22, 2024 2:33 pm

It’s not about science any more”

It never was. It was always about “the cause”.

UK-Weather Lass
November 20, 2024 12:11 am

Isn’t 0.1C one of those ‘your eyes are sharper than mine’ jobs whether the reading is either up or down.

Reply to  UK-Weather Lass
November 20, 2024 2:57 am

Or “I’m taller than you, so temperature is much, much higher!” when reading a thermometer…

Bryan A
Reply to  Zig Zag Wanderer
November 20, 2024 11:57 am

Don’t taller people see the line just a little lower on the gradient than shorter people?
Taller people do see the line from above…perhaps that is why they adjust the temps upwards.

Reply to  Bryan A
November 21, 2024 4:07 am

Draw a quick diagram. It will clarify the position of eyes, lines of measurement, and position of the liquid.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  UK-Weather Lass
November 20, 2024 11:56 am

We need a surfer to confirm that 0.1 C.

November 20, 2024 12:54 am

We have been battling the dreaded carbon dioxide for decades such as blowing up power stations, scrapping perfectly good ICE vehicles, ripping out efficient gas boilers and installing air/ground source heaters (*my neighbour installed one 3 years ago and this year he has just had a wood burner fitted!!).
My question; by how many degrees Centigrade has the Earth cooled by all the measures we have taken including crippling our economies to lower our CO2 emissions over the last few decades??

Coeur de Lion
November 20, 2024 1:04 am

Cupping my ear to hear it on the British Broadcasting Company

UK-Weather Lass
Reply to  Coeur de Lion
November 20, 2024 1:17 am

Apparently incorrectly announced on the auto caption device as ‘The BBC Mourning Show”

Art Slartibartfast
November 20, 2024 1:14 am

“…the world would be only about 0.1 C cooler”. this assumes that the models the IPCC uses are correct, and CMIP6 runs hot.

Dave Fair
Reply to  Art Slartibartfast
November 20, 2024 9:06 am

Yes, every time one of those bogus temperature reductions is cited the provenance of the fantasy figures should be cited; CliSciFi fictitious models.

Ed Zuiderwijk
November 20, 2024 1:26 am

BBC news today: what will be decided in Baku has a direct effect on lives of polar bears. Plus some expert muppet waffling the usual laments and lies.

strativarius
November 20, 2024 2:03 am

Climate scientists have issued a shock declaration that the “climate emergency” is over.


And yet… the shocking fact is that there never was one to begin with.

Rod Evans
November 20, 2024 3:20 am

Well that is pretty clear and unambiguous isn’t it?
Thank god the adults are once again speaking truth to power.
It will be interesting to see if the MSM reports any of this.

November 20, 2024 3:27 am

Will this story be on the front page of the NY Times? Probably not.

Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
November 20, 2024 3:30 am

I don’t think governor Healey of Wokeachusetts has heard the story.

Will offshore wind power in Mass. survive the Trump administration?

Massachusetts has been making big investments in offshore wind power as a source of renewable energy, but President-elect Trump has promised to pull the plug on the industry. As key stakeholders meeting Tuesday, Massachusetts Gov. Maura Healey asked, “why would you want to kill tens of thousands of jobs?”

Dave Fair
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
November 20, 2024 9:13 am

“why would you want to kill tens of thousands of jobs?”

To avoid taxpayers and electric ratepayers unnecessarily paying people to do unproductive activities.

Reply to  Dave Fair
November 20, 2024 11:34 am

The state of MA is the largest employer in the state- I believe with about 85K employees- and most are extremely well paid- more than they could earn in the private sector, IMHO. Many are good workers but many are not. I’ve been watching and interacting with the state burro-ocracies for over half a century. They just love creating unnecessary paper work.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  Dave Fair
November 20, 2024 11:58 am

Because the vast majority of that work is not US based.

Corrigenda
November 20, 2024 3:28 am

I am delighted that real scientists have spoken at last.

November 20, 2024 3:50 am

My favorite statement in this list:
“Climate models are inherently incapable of telling us anything about how much global warming there will be or about whether or to what extent the warming has a natural or anthropogenic cause.”
Perfect.

On the other hand:
“The Sun, and not greenhouse gases, has contributed and will continue to contribute the overwhelming majority of global temperature.”
Better to acknowledge that “greenhouse gases” (i.e., non-condensing CO2, CH4, N2O) do not contribute ANY energy to the land + ocean + atmosphere climate system to drive the temperature up. It is also not possible to isolate the incremental radiative effect of rising concentrations of “greenhouse gases” for reliable attribution of ANY of the reported temperature trends.

Glad to see Monckton mentioned. I have to admit I miss his posts here at WUWT.

Reply to  David Dibbell
November 20, 2024 11:57 am

Any mention of CMoB brings the ruler monkeys ’round.

Duane
November 20, 2024 4:01 am

More accurately:

Normal human beings refuse to participate in the mutual suicide pact of warmunism any longer.

Anthony Banton
November 20, 2024 5:25 am

Climate scientists have issued a shock declaration that the “climate emergency” is over.”

Oh really!

pavel-kalenda
https://science.lpnu.ua/all-authors-journals/pavel-kalenda
Appears to be a geologist.

Guus Berkhout
%20founded%20the%20Netherlands%2Dbased,emissions%20being%20made%20into%20law.
“During his time at Delft University Berkhout was the founder and scientific director of the Delphi Consortium, which does seismic research for a consortium of oil and gas companies.”

Marcel Crok, The Netherlands
“I have a background in physical chemistry. After university I became a science writer”.

Lord Monckton
Degrees in the Classics and Journalism
.
Valentina Zharkova
She works on solar magnetism, but has absolutely no training in atmospheres or climate science.

Milan Šálek
Well there’s one at least

Václav Procházka
https://independent.academia.edu/V%C3%A1clavProch%C3%A1zka
appears to be a geologist

Gregory Wrightstone
a geologist who spent decades working for the natural gas industry.

Jan Pokorný
Pokorný’s research focuses on the role of plants in cooling the environment through evapotranspiration, a process that consumes most of the solar energy that reaches land.

Szarka László
Geophysicist-engineer; Ordinary Member of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences

James Croll
“James Croll, FRS, (2 January 1821 – 15 December 1890) was a 19th-century Scottish scientist who developed a theory of climate variability based on changes in the Earth’s orbit.”
Present was he?

Tomáš Fürst
Specializations
differential equation, mathematical modeling, signal and image processing, machine learning, bayesian inference.

Gerald Ratzer
Research interests include modelling and simulation as used in real time applications, such as air traffic control simulators. Software derived from this research is running in 34 countries. Computer Assisted Learning (CAL) for several different fields ranging from high school to university level courses, both in Canada and overseas. This work is reflected in the course material that has created on the web at the links above and below. Other research work involves assistance to a team of McGill colleagues working on the processing by computer of scripted based calligraphic languages.

Douglas Pollock
is an Industrial Civil Engineer from the University of Chile. 

Henri Masson
education is in chemical engineering. He is a professor of Applied Economics at the University of Antwerp and visiting professor at the Maastricht School of Management. He is former Vice-President of the Société Royale Belge des Ingénieurs et Industriels (SRBII, franstallige engineers of Belgium)

Miroslav Žáček
Skills and Expertise
Environment
Compositional Data Analysis
Environmental Impact Assessment
Environmental Pollution
Heavy Metals
Ore Prospecting

Jan Erik Solheim 
professor emeritus at the Institute of Theoretical Astrophysics, University of Tromsø, Norway. He has studied cosmology, galaxies and rapidly variable stars. In recent years he has taken a closer look at the periodic fluctuations in the Earth’s climate and the possible astronomical reasons for these.

Mr.
Reply to  Anthony Banton
November 20, 2024 5:56 am

Anyone who follows the Scientific Method can be a “Climate Scientist”.

Trouble is, most of the “settled science” claimants are climate cranks who cling to the bandwagon narrative rather than adhere to classic scientific principles and practices.

hiskorr
Reply to  Anthony Banton
November 20, 2024 6:16 am

“…evapotranspiration, a process that consumes most of the solar energy that reaches land.”
I think you mean “transforms” rather than “consumes”.

Anthony Banton
Reply to  hiskorr
November 20, 2024 7:05 am

Just copied/pasted from here ….

https://www.wgbh.org/people/jan-pokorny

Reply to  Anthony Banton
November 20, 2024 11:44 am

Without having a single clue what you are copy-pasting.

Hilariously dumb as usual.

Reply to  Anthony Banton
November 20, 2024 6:19 am

Oh really!

From: https://psychologycorner.com/critical-thinking-resources/what-is-the-ad-hominem-fallacy/

Ad Hominem: Examples

1. Attacking the speaker’s credentials instead of addressing the argument.

You just love the ad hominem attacks don’t you? Your list of credentials in no way addresses the intellectual capability of these individuals to address climate related issues. You really need to up your game!

Anthony Banton
Reply to  Jim Gorman
November 20, 2024 7:03 am

Try basic comprehension:

The leadline from the OP highights “Climate scientists“.

I point out that all but one of them are not.

That is not :
“Attacking the speaker’s credentials instead of addressing the argument”

Just basic debunking of disingenuousness in the article.

But your comment is par for the course here at least..

Anthony Banton
Reply to  Anthony Banton
November 20, 2024 7:20 am

FYI:

This is a real example of an Ad Hom attack:

“…..Only a bunch of ignorant, brain-washed fools exist to keep the fairy-tale alive.
Are you proud to be one of then (sic), Nick ??”

From the oxymoron that is bnice2000

You’re welcome

Reply to  Anthony Banton
November 20, 2024 11:41 am

Poor Banton, Seem he is also one of the bunch of ignorant, brain-washed fools that exist to keep the fairy-tale alive.

Are you proud to be PAID to be one of them, Banton ??”

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  Anthony Banton
November 21, 2024 8:55 am

That is not an ad hominem attack.
An insult, yes, disparaging remark, yes, but the attack was not on his credentials, title or office.

Reply to  Anthony Banton
November 20, 2024 8:42 am

Try basic comprehension:

The leadline from the OP highights “Climate scientists“.

I point out that all but one of them are not.

Just basic debunking of disingenuousness in the article.

Why do you think a “climate scientist” must have a degree named “climate science”? That is a ridiculous assumption to start with.

Michael Mann

Dr. Mann received his undergraduate degrees in Physics and Applied Math from the University of California at Berkeley, an M.S. degree in Physics from Yale University, and a Ph.D. in Geology & Geophysics from Yale University.

NOT A CLIMATE SCIENTIST USING YOUR CRITERIA!

James Hansen
He obtained a B.A. in physics and mathematics with highest distinction in 1963, an M.S. in astronomy in 1965 and a Ph.D. in physics in 1967, all three degrees from the University of Iowa.

NOT A CLIMATE SCIENTIST USING YOUR CRITERIA!

You don’t even include a logical argument of why a “climate science” degree is needed to meet your approval!

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  Jim Gorman
November 20, 2024 12:02 pm

The is no degree in “Climate Science” offered anywhere.
Why? Too many disciplines are needed by one person.

Reply to  Anthony Banton
November 20, 2024 11:43 am

Try basic comprehension:”

Something Banton has never managed.

Every one of them would have far more real knowledge of climate, and atmospheric behaviour, than he has ever shown himself to be capable of.

Robert Cutler
Reply to  Anthony Banton
November 20, 2024 6:29 am

Great list, and a well-rounded list of disciplines. Croll was listed as a speaker but was not physically there. I’m guess this is a different Croll, or perhaps someone discussing his work. I’m guessing a different person given the title of his presentation “Does the geological evidence indicate a causal link between CO2 and climate change?”

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  Anthony Banton
November 20, 2024 6:43 am

Where does one go to university to get a Climate Science degree?

Curious minds want to know.

Ed Zuiderwijk
Reply to  Anthony Banton
November 20, 2024 8:24 am

People with a degree in whatever and over 50 years of age have shown that they have that one skill that is required: they can think. That’s all you need in order to know that the climate emergency is a scam.

Reply to  Anthony Banton
November 20, 2024 9:33 am

So basically a group of people who are much more capable of understanding thermodynamics, economics and “how things work” than say the IPCC team leaders consisting of university funding beggars, policy wonks, psychologists, sociologists, and research “managers” listed here:

https://www.ipcc.ch/bureau/

Reply to  Anthony Banton
November 20, 2024 11:34 am

And Banton lists a whole heap of people who have 10 to 100 times the knowledge he is capable of.

Hilarious.

Poor little cretin cannot counter a single point made.

Sean Galbally
November 20, 2024 5:43 am

AT LAST SOME COMMON SENSE. CLINTEL is a thoroughly respectable and highly qualified organisation which rises above our eco communist power elites. Their 18 point statement must be widely circulated in the media and governments be made to discuss the issues and accept that a contrary view to their group think may be correct. If this does not happen, the western world’s people will continue to be in for a totally unnecessarily torrid time.

JBP
November 20, 2024 5:59 am

I guess they had not read the latest science news:

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/climate-change-hurricane-wind-speeds

story tip

Dave Fair
Reply to  JBP
November 20, 2024 9:20 am

Brought to you by the instant weather attribution folks that use CliSciFi models instead of data.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  JBP
November 20, 2024 12:07 pm

As climate change heats up the equator, nature seeks to redistribute that heat to other parts of the world, says Climate Central’s Daniel Gilford, a climate scientist based in the Orlando, Fla., area. “The way that our atmosphere does it is with hurricanes.”

Redistribute heat to other parts of the world via hurricanes?

BS Alert!

From 2019 to 2023, climate change enhanced the maximum wind speeds of hurricanes

BS Alert!

Sparta Nova 4
November 20, 2024 6:50 am

There are over a dozen scientists who measured atmospheric CO2 during the 1800s. Their works are published in journals of the time.

Highly interesting is that CO2 in 1820 was as high as it is today.

Also curious is the CO2 levels used by the Climate Syndicate are based on 1850-1880 results which are the lowest levels in the 19th century.

Recent reports of a 3 km ice core drawn from Greenland glaciers have shown the Roman era was warm, the Medieval Optimum was real, the lows are all real, but interestingly there is a temperature surge in the early 1800s with the peak at approximately 1820.

Also curious is that the temperatures in the 1850 to 1880 timeframe are the lowest in the 19th century.

It seems there is a growing body of data that says the IPCC is issuing fecal matter and the media is eating it up with a spoon.

cuddywhiffer
November 20, 2024 6:54 am

With any luck, this winter will convince them of it.

Reply to  cuddywhiffer
November 20, 2024 8:50 am

Not so sure about that. If the winter can in any way be considered unusually cold/warm/wet/dry/long/short it’ll be, in the eyes of the true believers, because of climate change. Power cuts? – not enough windmills. No power cuts? – how marvellous we have all these windmills. You know the drill – nothing must be allowed to disrupt the narrative for these people.

William Capron
November 20, 2024 7:07 am

The young people will be extremely bummed out; they will protest for reductions in fossil fuel generated power. They are committed to others feeling the pain of transition. So, let’s start with cell-phones by limiting their use to 30 minutes a day. I know, I know, that’s not that much power, but it will deliver a powerful message to naive twits who demand we ‘do something.’ We’ll do something! If we make turning the cell-phones off [automagically] as a first step, we will never have to take a second step.

Bruce Cobb
November 20, 2024 7:08 am

Has the space alien emergency ended yet? I admit I haven’t been keeping up.

November 20, 2024 7:14 am

Story tip – This declaration should be sent to every, and I mean every, media source immediately. I am guessing less than 10% of the media will publish this on their front pages. Those that do not publish it – we should do everything possible to inform their readers of this and ask all who subscribe to these non publishers to cancel their subscriptions.

November 20, 2024 8:21 am

It has always been ONLY about money.

November 20, 2024 9:12 am

Rational conclusions, but unfortunately both Solheim and Zharkova have the wrong ideas about solar variability, and the wrong ideas about how solar variability influences the climate.

Verified by MonsterInsights