Climate sanity shock for Greens

President Trump’s Clexit (Climate Exit) from the Paris agreement is a great step towards recovery from the global warming hysteria.

With thanks to Josh: www.cartoonsbyjosh.com

Coming soon after the UK Brexit which rejected the EU green octopus, the US Clexit will encourage Clexit efforts in places like central Europe, Canada and the decaying green swamp-lands in Germany and France. The UK may even get the courage to “cut the green crap”.

This US Clexit follows the first step taken in 2010 when the canny Japanese refused to extend the Kyoto Protocol. And then Tony Abbott killed off Australia’s Carbon Tax.

The final step will be UN-CLEXIT – withdrawal from all UN climate agreements and obligations, and defunding the government climate “research” and propaganda industry.

Viv Forbes

vforbes@clexit.net

Rosevale   Qld

Australia

 

 

Further Reading
Full Text of President Donald Trump’s Clexit Speech:
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/06/01/statement-president-trump-paris-climate-accord
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9BUnqDEPmgY
Why the US Clexit was the Inevitable result of a Fatally Flawed Process:
http://www.thegwpf.com/gwpf-failure-of-paris-climate-deal-was-inevitable/
Trump leads the way and pops the Paris bubble:
http://joannenova.com.au/2017/06/trump-leads-way-in-popping-symbolic-paris-bubble/ 
“Clexit for a Brighter Future”; By Donn Dears, Critical Thinking Press, Paperback, 2017:
https://www.amazon.com/Clexit-Brighter-Future-Donn-Dears/product-reviews/0981511937
Who actually paid into the Green Climate Fund:
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/06/03/one-graphic-ays-it-all-who-actually-paid-in-to-the-paris-green-climate-fund/
http://www.climatefundsupdate.org/listing/green-climate-fund
Western climate change alarmists won’t admit they are wrong:
http://www.ipe.net.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/clive-james_040617.pdf
Losership vs Leadership on Paris deal:
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/06/03/losership-vs-leadership-on-the-parisagreement-on-climate/
The Paris Deal – Few benefits at Enormous Cost:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2016/04/21/climate-change-real-paris-treaty-costly-few-benefits-research-green-energy-column/83292440/
An Open Letter to All Australian Politicians, by Bob Brock, LNP member:
http://carbon-sense.com/2017/06/05/open-letter-to-all-australian-politicians/

41 Thoughts on “Climate sanity shock for Greens

  1. Andy on June 6, 2017 at 6:58 pm said:

    I’ve noticed quite a lot of TDS (Trump Derangement Syndrome) on social media and elsewhere.

    Herr Thomas of Hot Topic states in the comments on the former blog that the “USA has declared war on him and his children”

    It’s not the first time American’s have declared war on a German lunatic, so we should at least be thankful he acknowledges it

  2. Mike Jowsey on June 6, 2017 at 9:41 pm said:

    I think Viv is in danger of delusion by way of short-term euphoria. As I think Josh may also be, judging by his stock caricatures. Although significant, the real fight is ahead.

  3. Andy on June 7, 2017 at 10:24 am said:

    Speaking of TDS, I see the great unwashed, aka Greenpeace, government workers and other assorted losers, were out in force yesterday to protest at Rex Tillerson being in town

  4. Mack on June 7, 2017 at 9:12 pm said:

    Great news, Richard….it looks as if the Herald may have shut down its ‘climate change’ section….
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/climate-change/news/headlines.cfm?c_id=26

  5. Dennis N Horne on June 7, 2017 at 11:25 pm said:

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jun/07/china-and-california-sign-deal-to-work-on-climate-change-without-trump

    Chinese president Xi Jinping meets visiting California governor Jerry Brown to discuss a climate deal. [Photograph]

    China and California have signed an agreement to work together on reducing emissions, as the state’s governor warned that “disaster still looms” without urgent action on climate change.

    For now, he said, China, European countries and individual US states would fill the gap left by the federal government’s decision to abdicate leadership on the issue.

    “Nobody can stay on the sidelines. We can’t afford any dropouts in the tremendous human challenge to make the transition to a sustainable future,” Brown said. “Disaster still looms and we’ve got to make the turn.”

  6. Andy on June 8, 2017 at 8:59 am said:

    Jerry “Moonbeam” Brown. California, spirtual home of the Ecotard

  7. Magoo on June 8, 2017 at 11:17 am said:

    Regarding certain US states saying they will independently sign up to the Paris Accord: I’ve always been a firm believer that the best cure for socialism is to give the socialists what they want along with the bill. I think it’s hilarious that some states want to go it alone as all their industries will move to more business friendly states such as Texas. If businesses don’t move, their competitors will and will outperform & undercut them.

    Bring it on, it’ll be very funny watching them shoot themselves in the foot. Where will the new silicon valley be, in Houston or Dallas?

  8. Dennis N Horne on June 9, 2017 at 10:57 am said:

    https://www.theguardian.com/science/2017/jun/08/americans-under-siege-from-climate-disinformation-former-nasa-chief-scientist

    Americans are “under siege” from disinformation designed to confuse the public about the threat of climate change, Nasa’s former chief scientist has said.

    Speaking to the Guardian, Ellen Stofan, who left the US space agency in December, said that a constant barrage of half-truths had left many Americans oblivious to the potentially dire consequences of continued carbon emissions, despite the science being unequivocal.

    [IPCC climate report: human impact is ‘unequivocal’ – Read more]

    “We are under siege by fake information that’s being put forward by people who have a profit motive,” she said, citing oil and coal companies as culprits. “Fake news is so harmful because once people take on a concept it’s very hard to dislodge it.”

    During the past six months, the US science community has woken up to this threat, according to Stofan, and responded by ratcheting up efforts to communicate with the public at the grassroots level as well as in the mainstream press.

    “The harder part is this active disinformation campaign,” she said before her appearance at Cheltenham Science Festival this week. “I’m always wondering if these people honestly believe the nonsense they put forward. When they say ‘It could be volcanoes’ or ‘the climate always changes’… to obfuscate and to confuse people, it frankly makes me angry.” [continues]

  9. Dennis N Horne on June 9, 2017 at 11:11 am said:

    Considering the dramatic ongoing price drop of renewables, the massive increase in worldwide renewables employment, the staggering advances in renewable baseload, in grid technology and in storage and even without the threat of climate change – switching to renewables is a no-brainer.

    95% of economists agree.
    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2016/jan/04/consensus-of-economists-cut-carbon-pollution

  10. Andy on June 9, 2017 at 12:00 pm said:

    Just a quick question. How can renewables price drop when there is a “massive” increase in people being employed in the industry?

  11. Alexander K on June 9, 2017 at 9:33 pm said:

    I note that India’s solar industry is in grave danger of collapse due to intense consumer price competition. The power of the sun may be free, but harvesting that energy is obviously not.

  12. Magoo on June 9, 2017 at 11:09 pm said:

    Dennis quoted:
    “We are under siege by fake information that’s being put forward by people who have a profit motive”.

    That’s why I get all my information & data from the IPCC reports (I know, I know, but bear with me). The AR5 report shows the following:

    1/ All the climate models failing.
    http://www.climatechange2013.org/images/figures/WGI_AR5_FigTS-14.jpg

    2/ No evidence of positive feedback from water vapour.
    Table 2.8, page 197, Chapter 2, Working Group I: The Physical Science Basis, IPCC AR5 report, 2013.

    3/ No increase in extreme weather.
    http://rogerpielkejr.blogspot.co.nz/2013/10/coverage-of-extreme-events-in-ipcc-ar5.html

    4/ No increase in rate of sea level rise.
    http://www.climatechange2013.org/images/figures/WGI_AR5_FigTS_TFE.2-1.jpg

    5/ A warming ‘hiatus’ (IPCC) of 15 years to 2012.
    Box TS.3, page 61, Technical Summary, Working Group I: The Physical Science Basis, IPCC AR5 report, 2013.

    Perhaps the IPCC are in the pay of ‘big oil’ as well.

  13. Dennis N Horne on June 9, 2017 at 11:18 pm said:

    https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-rise-of-wind-power-in-texas/

    The Rise of Wind Power in Texas
    Wind’s competitiveness in the Lone Star State has been helped by the expansion of transmission capacity and market reforms. By Benjamin Storrow, ClimateWire on April 14, 2017

    During a visit yesterday to the Harvey mine in Sycamore, Pa., U.S. EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt declared that “the war on coal is done.” But if the regulatory battle is over, the fight in coal’s largest domestic market has just begun.

    Wind generation accounted for nearly 23 percent of power generation for the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) in the first quarter of 2017, the Lone Star State grid operator said this week. [continues]

    The mad old fart Trump and the sociopath Prout (Fr) get the coal shoulder from real Americans.

  14. Dennis N Horne on June 9, 2017 at 11:25 pm said:

    Climate Science Deniers have:
    1. Lost their war on science
    2. Lost their war on scientists
    3. Lost their war politically
    4. Lost their war economically
    5. Lost their war morally
    6. Lost their way

  15. Magoo on June 9, 2017 at 11:38 pm said:

    US Geological Survey: Largest oil deposit ever found in U.S. discovered in Texas in 2016:

    https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/nation-now/2016/11/17/usgs-largest-oil-deposit-ever-found-us-discovered-texas/94013292/

    Good times for Texas ahead.

  16. Dennis N Horne on June 10, 2017 at 1:49 am said:

    7. Lost their marbles.

    CO2 from fossil fuels is destabilising the climate. According to the oil companies. Oil will not be for energy but for future generations – good times ahead.

    Covfefe. Covfefe. Covfefe.

    Amen.

  17. Magoo on June 10, 2017 at 9:45 am said:

    Dennis:

    ‘CO2 from fossil fuels is destabilising the climate.’

    Not according to all the empirical data I posted above from the IPCC AR5 report. Now who are you going to believe dear boy, the oil companies or the IPCC?

    Also, regarding your comment:

    ‘Climate Science Deniers have:
    1. Lost their war on science
    2. Lost their war on scientists
    3. Lost their war politically
    4. Lost their war economically
    5. Lost their war morally
    6. Lost their way
    7. Lost their marbles.’

    You are 100% correct, but it’s not us who are denying the empirical data in the AR5 report, is it – you’re the ‘Climate Science Denier’, not us. 😉

  18. Alexander K on June 10, 2017 at 4:47 pm said:

    Dennis must be a charming bloke to have in a group – talks utter nonsense, then uses a juvenile set of manners and names to heap his disapproval on those he disagrees with.
    His Naa-naa-na-naa-naa stlye reminds me more than somewhat of the years I spent settling playground spats between immature high school students.

  19. Magoo on June 11, 2017 at 11:05 am said:

    Alexander:

    ‘His Naa-naa-na-naa-naa stlye reminds me more than somewhat of the years I spent settling playground spats between immature high school students.’

    Hence the term ‘dear boy’.

  20. Dennis N Horne on June 11, 2017 at 11:45 am said:

    Magoof. Yeah right! The Royal Society, National Academy of Sciences, American Association for the Advancement of Science, American Physical Society, American Chemical Society etc etc etc got the science all wrong. Ha Ha Ha. Do you have no insight? Into your madness?

  21. Dennis N Horne on June 11, 2017 at 11:45 am said:

    https://www.ecowatch.com/koch-brothers-trump-climate-2436753305.html

    When he withdrew from the Paris agreement last week, Donald Trump gave a speech so filled with falsehoods that it triggered detailed rebuttals by publications ranging from Politifact to Scientific American. The Washington Post’s “Fact Checker” column, which hands out “Pinocchios” … But by then Trump probably had more Pinocchios than the Disneyland gift shop.

    NY Times laid this transformation squarely at the feet of the Koch Brothers: “Republican lawmakers were moved along by a campaign carefully crafted by fossil fuel industry players, most notably Charles D. and David H. Koch …

    The Koch network of funders spent an estimated $1 billion over the last few election cycles telling the Republican Party what to do. “It is, perhaps, the most astounding example of influence-buying in modern American political history,” wrote Jane Mayer in the New Yorker.

  22. Andy on June 13, 2017 at 1:08 pm said:

    Dennis, why are you here? You have already stated that you hate and despise us.

    We get the memo. Dennis N Horne is a psychopath.

    I suggest you turn yourself into the police before you do anymore harm

  23. Andy on June 13, 2017 at 1:42 pm said:

    By the way, this technique of making someone feel that they are insane is know as “gaslighting”, named after the film Gaslight.

    It seems to be a common tactic these days, so I thought I’d join in too.

  24. In reply to Denis N Horne: https://www.climateconversation.org.nz/2017/06/climate-sanity-shock-for-greens/#comment-1533843

    Jerry Brown said, “despite the science being unequivocal”, I personally do not believe in the religious notion of “unequivocal”. I am skeptical of such notions.

    Jerry Brown said, “Nobody can stay on the sidelines. We can’t afford any dropouts in the tremendous human challenge to make the transition to a sustainable future,” Brown said. “Disaster still looms and we’ve got to make the turn.”

    I think that is a very notable quote actually. The first sentence is a problem. The second a dilemma. The third a call to action, based upon the two prepositions.

    Firstly, anybody can “stay on the sidelines” if they choose to so do. If I do not have enough information to draw a conclusion then I need more information. If the information is inconclusive to my intellect then my intellect may decide to remain on the fence. That is what we, in civilised societies, call Freedom. Otherwise, who made Jerry the dictator? This preposition invokes the notion that there are only two possible positions. Such a notion is shortsighted, dogmatic and unsustainable. There are many positions, and debate is needed. So Governor Brown should debate, rather than issue edicts that a person must adopt one of two narrow positions.

    The dilemma of the second is related to the first and uses ad-hominem to boot. The idea that somebody who disagrees wit the learned Guvner is a “drop-out” is calling people names. Ad Hominem. And then he uses President Trump’s favourite word, “Tremendous”. (Irony, not relevant, but ironical nevertheless.) And the dilemma is regarding the future, what is sustainable? This dilemma we are still trying to figure out while
    Brown tells me that ha has it all figured. And we must agree or be drop-outs. And then we must cope with the assumed correlations of “human challenge, transition and sustainable”, each of which may be considerably debated and should be.

    The call to action, “we’ve got to make the turn.” is based upon the assumption that everyone agrees exactly what is the “the”. Or, more exactly, in which direction the turn is turning us.

    Forgive me if I remain on the fence. I invoke my human right to so do. If I see convincing evidence to the contrary, I am willing to change my entire point of view. Yet you show me none.

  25. It is pretty hard to describe science as “unequivocal” when the actual reports describe various scenarios and climate sensitivities with a wide range of variables.

    As far as “doing something”, electric cars looked promising, but a new report shows that it takes 8 years of driving a Tesla to recoup the extra CO2 emissions (over a regular diesel) because of the battery

    If you hammer the battery with lots of fast charging, there may never be any net CO2 reduction

    Having said that, the Tesla does look like a nice car and the lack of noise factor is a plus

  26. HemiMck on June 16, 2017 at 1:55 pm said:

    Various

    “When he withdrew from the Paris agreement last week, Donald Trump gave a speech. ….” which middle America related to and applauded particularly when they found out what Obama had committed to the New World Government Green Fund. Nobody but the troughers cares about the rebuttals. America understood for the first time.

    I saw some Tesla’s demo’d the other day and they are fantastic cars. But then they should be after having received $6 billion of grants, subsidies and tax concessions and funny money (carbon credits).

    I am wondering what level of reductions in emissions California managed to negotiate from China?

  27. Maggy Wassilieff on June 16, 2017 at 11:13 pm said:

    A long, but very readable account of Clive James’ Climate-change scepticism

    “Mass death dies hard”
    http://www.ipe.net.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/clive-james_040617.pdf

  28. Andy on June 17, 2017 at 8:01 pm said:

    Maggy, thanks for sharing the Clive James piece

    That is a truly wonderful piece of writing

  29. Dennis N Horne on June 17, 2017 at 9:58 pm said:

    https://seekingalpha.com/article/4069065-elon-musk-begs-feds-please-end-teslas-tax-subsidy

    Elon Musk Begs The Feds: Please End Tesla’s Tax Subsidy. May. 4.17

    On the 1Q earnings call, Elon Musk delivered an impassioned plea that the federal electric car subsidies hurt Tesla relative to other automakers.

    ============================================

    What was the subsidy to the Detroit Auto companies? Didn’t the government bail them out to the extent of buying them?

    The subsidies to oil companies are TRILLIONS every year.

    I really can’t be bothered checking the details because evidence has no effect on you.

    Even Exxon knows the game’s up. It knew about man-made global warming in the 1970s.
    ================

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-02-23/exxon-s-new-chief-endorses-carbon-tax-to-combat-climate-change

    Exxon’s New Chief Endorses Carbon Tax to Combat Climate Change

    In his first blog post since succeeding Rex Tillerson, the new head of Exxon Mobil Corp. focused on climate change, calling for a carbon tax to discourage use of polluting fuels.

    Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Darren Woods said a revenue-neutral carbon tax “would promote greater energy efficiency and the use of today’s lower-carbon options, avoid further burdening the economy, and also provide incentives for markets to develop additional low-carbon energy solutions for the future.”

  30. Andy on June 18, 2017 at 9:05 am said:

    Subsidies to oil companies are not “trillions”
    Most of us know the difference between direct subsidies and tax concessions

    At least oil companies actually turn a profit. Oops sorry, the P word is verboten for commies eh?

  31. Magoo on June 18, 2017 at 10:47 am said:

    You’d think a self employed dentist would know the difference between a tax deduction and a ‘subsidy’ – typical alarmist, always fecally loaded (to put it politely).

    Governments prefer to tax consumer’s oil use due to it’s high profitability rather than subsidise it, excluding oil producing states such as Iran & Venezuela that is:

    http://www.aa.co.nz/cars/maintenance/fuel-prices-and-types/petrol/

  32. Richard Treadgold on June 18, 2017 at 3:22 pm said:

    Good link, Magoo, thanks. I’m glad that you and Andy have raised this tax deduction/subsidy sham. The alarmists’ use of the term ‘subsidy’ to describe the routine practice of preventing a business’s income being inflated by the taxes it includes is as devious as describing the completely harmless gas carbon dioxide as ‘pollution’.

  33. “Celebrities, scientists join new nationwide push for action on climate change”
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11878784

    I always take my advice from celebrities. If I have a medical concern, or my computer needs fixing, ask a celebrity

    97% of celebrities agree that we need to “take action” on climate change.

    What can the common man in the street do?

    Urge your local celebrities to get onto Twitter and agree with each other. We cannot wait. We need to take action!

  34. Richard Treadgold on June 19, 2017 at 12:27 pm said:

    Heh. Andy, I just love your sense of humour.

  35. Andy on June 19, 2017 at 7:54 pm said:

    I think it is worth noting that one of the names “celebrities”, Robyn Malcolm, is plugging natural blood pressure medicine on TV commercials at the moment.

    Maybe there is a direct linkage between hectoring people about climate change and their blood pressure?

    I sense a conspiracy. Paging Alex Jones …

  36. Andy on June 20, 2017 at 2:51 pm said:

    Under NZ Green party proposals:

    A new visa category would also allow for up to 100 climate change refugees, primarily from the Pacific, to be allowed to migrate to New Zealand.

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/93824008/greens-unveil-policy-to-raise-refugee-quota-to-5000-within-six-years?cid=facebook.post.93824008

    What about climate change refugees from the East of Christchurch? Are they denying that climate change exists in Christchurch? Are they denying that sea levels are rising twice as fast in ChCh than some Pacific Islands?

  37. Magoo on June 20, 2017 at 9:36 pm said:

    This one’s a biggie.

    Here’s a new paper in Nature by Santer, Mann, Mears etc. admitting how the climate models have failed & the ‘hiatus’ is real – they even use satellite records instead of the less accurate land based temperature records:

    https://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ngeo2973.html

    ‘Over most of the early twenty-first century, however, model tropospheric warming is substantially larger than observed; warming rate differences are generally outside the range of trends arising from internal variability.’ … ‘We conclude that model overestimation of tropospheric warming in the early twenty-first century is partly due to systematic deficiencies in some of the post-2000 external forcings used in the model simulations.’

    Here’s a write up about it in the news:

    http://dailycaller.com/2017/06/19/take-a-look-at-the-new-consensus-on-global-warming/

    Looks like those with their noses in the trough of public funds are trying to keep their jobs now Trump is closing down their little circus. The big rats are leaving the sinking ship now.

  38. Magoo on June 21, 2017 at 10:55 am said:

    Here’s the full Santer, Mann, Mears et al paper here. I haven’t had a chance to read it in full yet but thought I’d put it up in case it disappears:

    https://sci-hub.io/10.1038/ngeo2973

  39. Maggy Wassilieff on June 22, 2017 at 6:37 am said:

    Anthony Watts (WUWT) intends traveling to NZ next month.
    He is willing to meet up with folks.
    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/06/21/status-update-and-sincere-thanks/

  40. ClimateOtter on June 22, 2017 at 8:54 am said:

    Saw your comment to Anthony on WUWT. Your blog is now added to my climate folder. Thanks for being there!

  41. Hi Maggy,I txt Leighton Smith to let him know Anthony Watts is coming to NZ next month suggesting he try an get him on newstalk ZB,that would be good to see. No reply. Who arranged the talks with Christopher Monkton? I went to that. Someone must have contacts to make meetings with A.W. Love to see him.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Post Navigation