New global network of sceptical climate scientists

A significant new collaboration will present rational views of climate change theory and observation on a global stage.

European Climate Declaration

From: Professor Guus Berkhout

23 September 2019


Sr. António Guterres,
United Nations,
United Nations Headquarters,
New York, NY 10017,
United States of America.

Ms. Patricia Espinosa Cantellano,
Executive Secretary,
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change,
UNFCCC Secretariat,
UN Campus,
Platz der Vereinten Nationen 1,
53113 Bonn, Germany.


Your Excellencies,

There is no climate emergency

A global network of more than 500 knowledgeable and experienced scientists and professionals in climate and related fields have the honor to address to Your Excellencies the attached European Climate Declaration, for which the signatories to this letter are the national ambassadors.

The general-circulation models of climate on which international policy is at present founded are unfit for their purpose. Therefore, it is cruel as well as imprudent to advocate the squandering of trillions of dollars on the basis of results from such immature models. Current climate policies pointlessly and grievously undermine the economic system, putting lives at risk in countries denied access to affordable, reliable electrical energy.

We urge you to follow a climate policy based on sound science, realistic economics and genuine concern for those harmed by costly but unnecessary attempts at mitigation.

We ask you to place the Declaration on the agenda of your imminent New York session.

We also invite you to organize with us a constructive high-level meeting between world-class scientists on both sides of the climate debate early in 2020. Such a meeting would be consistent with the historically proven principles of sound science and natural justice that both sides should be fully and fairly heard. Audiatur et altera pars! [hear the other side]

Please let us know your thoughts [on] how we bring about such a momentous joint meeting.

Yours sincerely,

Professor Guus Berkhout The Netherlands
Professor Richard Lindzen USA
Professor Reynald du Berger French Canada
Professor Ingemar Nordin Sweden
Terry Dunleavy New Zealand
Jim O’Brien Irish Republic
Viv Forbes Australia
Professor Alberto Prestininzi Italy
Professor Jeffrey Foss English Canada
Professor Benoît Rittaud France
Morten Jødal Norway
Professor Fritz Vahrenholt Germany
Rob Lemeire Belgium
Monckton of Brenchley UK

Ambassadors of the European Climate Declaration

Views: 1004

6 Thoughts on “New global network of sceptical climate scientists

  1. Ron Williams on 27/09/2019 at 4:38 pm said:

    About time some common sense was spoken by those in leadership positions instead of the unforgivable scaremongering going on about what is quite normal for planets in this Universe. Change is natural and part of normal life. Extremist views from leftest/feminist leaders are creating unnecessary havoc amongst young people. People espousing these crazy “doomsday” scenarios should be held accountable.
    Ron Williams

  2. Simon on 27/09/2019 at 8:51 pm said:

    Terry Dunleavy isn’t a scientist.
    Viv Forbes isn’t a scientist.
    Viscount Monckton isn’t a scientist.
    Where are the genuine climate experts? Those on the list so far are emeritus and haven’t been involved in active research for years.

  3. Richard Treadgold on 28/09/2019 at 10:00 pm said:


    Where are the genuine climate experts?

    Right. Just shout from the sidelines. You’re no climate scientist either.

  4. Ian Cooper on 29/09/2019 at 1:42 pm said:

    Simon, when you say ‘Climate Scientist,’ do you mean the likes of Al Gore, Leonardo di Caprio, Lucy Lawless, Prince Charles, Prince Harry, Brian Cox (who does no actual science), or any other celebrity mouthpiece you are quite happy to have represent your side of the debate? The debate that you say is over, when in actual fact your side is too scared to front. The debate you arrogantly declare over in order to avoid explaining the faults in your argument that this declaration clearly points out.

  5. Bonzadog on 12/10/2019 at 7:59 am said:

    I have noticed that the Anti-Climat changers all come from the right to ultra-right political spectrum and tend to believes trumps “‘It’s a hoax” and “it a rumour from the Chinese to harm the US”.

    Bit odd considering all the evidence of glacier melting etc. If the changers are right we may avert a worsening climate, if wrong we get better air. However, if the Anti section is right nothing will happen if wrong the climate goes downhill.

    But, yes, in all fairness there is a bit too much overreaction, but I think the time is running out.

    America has no scientists in the Environment Protection Agency — all come from the energy sector…..mmmm.

    My apologies, Bonzadog. I didn’t notice your comment waiting for moderation until this morning. Thanks for visiting. – RT

  6. Richard Treadgold on 16/10/2019 at 12:45 pm said:


    I have noticed that the Anti-Climat changers all come from the right to ultra-right political spectrum and tend to believes trumps “‘It’s a hoax” and “it a rumour from the Chinese to harm the US”.

    It’s blind ignorance to make these claims about people you don’t know. Since Trump didn’t create the idea of a hoax, the mere fact that he repeats it does not refute it. Neither is it a Chinese rumour. Heard of logic?

    Bit odd considering all the evidence of glacier melting etc.

    Study glaciers a little, as I have done, and you find there are several factors that influence the advance and retreat of glaciers. Atmospheric warming is only one of them, and many glaciers started to retreat well before 1900, when it could not have been caused by human emissions. A 2017 NZ paper claims that the New Zealand region was cooling naturally between 1983 and 2008. Even before the IPCC was created, our glaciers were advancing.

    If the changers are right we may avert a worsening climate, if wrong we get better air.

    Yes, well this is just the precautionary principle, isn’t it? Not the best way of regulating human society. An asteroid could plunge to earth at any moment, therefore we must live in hardened underground bunkers and never emerge. No thanks. Better air, you say? It’s ridiculous to imagine that reducing emissions of carbon dioxide, the gas of life, food for plants, could possibly improve air quality.

    The warmsters think colourless, odourless, tasteless, non-toxic, harmless emissions of carbon dioxide from our life-improving, life-saving industry and transport are wrecking the planet — though evidence is absent — while they ignore the inconvenient truth that high-energy-density hydrocarbons, in only about 150 years, have lifted countless millions around the world out of a short, brutish life of poverty and into the health, education, income and comfort levels of the middle classes.

    Have a look at some of my posts: Royal Society of NZ refuses to reveal evidence of man-made climate change, Royal Society must explain refusal to justify climate policy, IPCC achieves Net Zero … credibility, Study shows NZ has been cooling for 26 years, WMO Secretary-General warns against climate ‘doomsters and extremists’.

    I have posted more than 1300 articles over 15 years revealing contrary evidence, refuting arguments and casting strong doubt on the fact-free, doom-laden global warming messages from the mainstream media, the UN and, now, Extinction Rebellion.

    I hope we can open your mind.

Leave a Reply

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

Post Navigation