Herald prints climate sceptic’s letter

click to enlarge

We congratulate our friend Terry Dunleavy for his breakthrough in persuading the NZ Herald to publish his letter.

Regular readers know of the Herald’s intransigence in holding to the alarmist view of climate change, almost never offering a balancing view. Today, Terry Dunleavy, hon. secretary of the NZ Climate Science Coalition, finally got a letter published. Must be election season. Perhaps we should thank Jacinda for overhyping the climate change “threat” as “my generation’s nuclear-free moment”, thus turning it into an election issue.

Anyway, it is extremely gratifying to see such persuasive climate arguments made so clearly before so colossal an audience.

Well done, Terry.

 

7
Leave a Reply

avatar
7 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
5 Comment authors
Maggy WassilieffRichard TreadgoldMagooDennis N HorneSimon Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
Notify of
Simon
Guest
Simon

The Herald used to regularly post opinion articles from Chris de Freitas. Unfortunately Terry does not have the same academic credentials. A balanced view would be giving AGW ‘skeptics’ 3% news space compared to 97% from acknowledged climate experts.
Terry does not understand that it is the CO2 flux, i.e. the difference between sources and sinks that is important.
CO2 fertilisation is only effective if it is the scarcest resource. This is seldom the case, refer to Liebig’s law of the Minimum.
There are many papers that provide evidence of the effect of greenhouse gases on the earth’s climate just as there are many papers that document the underlying theory. Terry will no doubt argue that none of them “prove” AGW as if this was some elementary high school maths problem. Real science isn’t like that, it’s about drawing together multiple strands of evidence to support the theoretical conclusions.

Maggy Wassilieff
Guest
Maggy Wassilieff


CO2 fertilisation is only effective if it is the scarcest resource. This is seldom the case,

Someone needs to start reading the vast literature on CO2 enhancement of crop and forest production.

Someone should read the latest findings on increases in Global NPP

Start here:
https://www.cato.org/blog/half-century-increase-global-terrestrial-net-primary-production-driven-primarily-rising

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/316606334_Quantification_of_the_response_of_global_terrestrial_net_primary_production_to_multifactor_global_change

Dennis N Horne
Guest
Dennis N Horne

To all intents and purposes all climate scientists — >30,000 — and all scientific institutions and scientific societies accept that the evidence for man-made global warming is incontrovertible.

So where does that leave Dunleavy?

Magoo
Guest
Magoo

Ah Dennis dear boy, you’re back again.

‘To all intents and purposes all climate scientists — >30,000 — and all scientific institutions and scientific societies accept that the evidence for man-made global warming is incontrovertible.’

Yes, you’re correct, even all the sceptic scientists like Drs. Roy Spencer, Judith Curry, John Christie, James Lovelock, etc. believe as well. The problem is the empirical temperature datasets have falsified the doomsday climate models thereby proving that the effects of CO2 aren’t as bad as predicted & are inconsequential, that’s all – the evidence is incontrovertible:

http://www.climatechange2013.org/images/figures/WGI_AR5_FigTS-14.jpg

If you really believe that AGW is such a problem dear boy, then why do you spend your weekends hypocritically burning fossil fuels flying planes around as a hobby?:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2537244/Pilot-crash-landed-beach-attempts-taxis-straight-sea.html

Maggy Wassilieff
Guest
Maggy Wassilieff

Seems some of those scientists and scientific institutions don’t know how to collect temperature readings correctly.
https://www.spectator.com.au/2017/09/not-really-fit-for-purpose-the-bureau-of-meteorology/

Post Navigation